Skip to main content

Full text of "Biblical commentary on the Old Testament"

See other formats 


.a*BUj 


MiB 


THE  LIBRARY 

o£ 

VICTORIA  UNIVERSITY 

Toronto 


CLARK'S 


FOEEIGN 


THEOLOGICAL   LIBRARY. 


FOURTH  SEEIES. 
VOL.  VI. 


aeil  anK  i3tItt|StIj  on  ti)t  ^entattutl). 
VOLUME   III. 


EDINBURGH: 

T.  AND  T.  CLARK,  38,  GEORGE  STREET. 

MDCCCLXVII. 


MUKRAT   AND   GIEB,    KDINBURCn, 
PUINTEKS  TO  HEE   MAJKSTl'S  ST.vnOSEUV   OFFICE. 


BIBLICAL  COMMENTARY 


ON 


THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 


BY 


C.  F.  KEIL,  D.D.,  AND  F.  DELITZSCH,  D.D, 

PROFESSORS  OF  THEOLOGY. 


VOLUME  III. 

THE    PENTATEUCH. 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  GERMAN 
BY  THE 

KEY.    JAMES  MARTIN,   B.A., 

NOTTINGHAM. 


EDINBURGH: 
T.  AND  T.  CLARK,  38,  GEORGE  STREET. 

LONDON :  HAMILTON,  ADAMS,  &  CO.     DUBLIN :  JOHN  ROBERTSON  &  CO. 

MDCCCLXVIT. 


EMMANUn* 


219 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES  (NUMBERS). 

Introduction. 

Page 
Contents  and  Arrangement  of  the  Book  of  Numbers,       ...  1 


Exposition. 

I.  Preparations  for  the  Departure  of  Israel  from  Sinai  (Chap.  i.  1-x.  10) 
Numbering  of  the  People  of  Israel  at  Sinai  (Chap,  i.-iv.),    . 
Spiritual  Organization  of  the  Congregation  of  Israel  (Chap.  v.  and 

vi.), 

Closing  Events  at  Sinai  (Chap,  vii.-ix.  14), 

Signs  and  Signals  for  the  March  (Chap.  ix.  15-x.  10), 


II.  Journey  from  Sinai  to  the  Steppes  of  Moab  (Chap.  x.  11-xxi.), 
From  Sinai  to  Kadesh  (Chap.  x.  11-xiv.  45)  : — 

Removal  of  the  Camp  from  the  Desert  of  Sinai  (Chap.  x. 

11-36), 56 

Occurrences  at  Tabeerah  and  ICibroth-Hattaavah  (Chap,  xi.),  .        64 
Rebellion  of  Miriam  and  Aaron  against  Moses  (Chap,  xii.),       .        75 
Spies  sent  out.     Murmuring  of  the  People,  and  their  Punish- 
ment (Chap.  xiii.  and  xiv.),  .  .  .  .83 
Occurrences  during  the  Thirty-seven  Years  of  Wandering  in  the 

Wilderness  (Chap,  xv.-xix.),  .  .  .  .99 

Various  Laws  of  Sacrifice.     Punishment  of  a  Sabbath-breaker. 

Command  to  wear  Tassels  upon  the  Clothes  (Chap,  xv.),   .       100 
RebeUion  of  Korah's  Company  (Chap,  xvi.-xvii.  5),      .  .       105 

Punishment  of  the  murmuring  Congregation,  and  Confirmation 

of  the  High-priesthood  of  Aaron  (Chap.  xvi.  41-xvii.  13  ; 

or.  Chap.  xvii.  6-28),         .  .  ...  .111 

Service  and  Revenues  of  the  Priests  and  Levites  (Chap,  xviii.),      115 
The  Law  concerning  Purification  from  the  Uncleanness  of 

Death  (Chap,  xix.), 120 


28 
42 
52 

56 


Vi  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

Page 
Israel's  Last  Journey  from  Kadesli  to  the  Heights  of  Pisgah  in  the 

Fields  of  Moab  (Chap.  xx.  and  xxi.),  .  .  .       126 

Death  of  Miriam.   Water  out  of  the  Eock.   Refusal  of  a  Passage 

through  Edom.     Aaron's  Death.     Conquest  over  the  King 

of  Ajad  (Chap,  xx.-xxi.  3),  .  .  .  .127 

March  round  the  Land  of  Edom  and  Moab.    Conquest  of  Sihon 

and  Og,  Kings  of  the  Amorites  (Chap.  xxi.  4-35),  .       138 

in.  Occurrences  in  the  Steppes  of  Moab,  with  Instructions  relating  to 
the  Conquest  and  Distribution  of  the  Land  of  Canaan  (Chap 
xxii.-xxxvi.),    .  .  .... 

Balaam  and  his  Prophecies  (Chap.  xxii.  2-xxiv.  25), 
Whoredom  of  Israel,  and  Zeal  of  Phinehas  (Chap,  xxv.), 
Mustering  of  Israel  in  the  Steppes  of  Moab  (Chap,  xxvi.),    . 
The  Daughters  of  Zelophehad  claim  to  Inherit.      The  Death  of 
Moses  foretold :  Consecration  of  Joshua  as  his  Successor  (Chap 
xxvii.),  ....... 

Order  of  the  Daily  and  Festal  Offerings  of  the  Congregation  (Chap 
xxviii.  and  xxix.),  ..... 

Instructions  as  to  the  Force  of  Vows  (Chap,  xxx.),  . 

War  of  Revenge  against  the  Midianites  (Chap,  xxxi.). 

Division  of  the  Conquered  Land  beyond  the  Jordan  among  the 

Tribes  of  Reuben,  Gad,  and  half-Manasseh  (Chap,  xxxii.), 
List  of  Israel's  Encampments  (Chap,  xxxiii.  1-49), 
Instructions  concerning  the  Conquest  and  Distribution  of  Canaan 

(Chap,  xxxiii.  50-xxxvi.  13),    . 
Law  concerning  the  Marriage  of  Heiresses  (Chap,  xxxvi.),  . 


156 
157 
203 

207 


212 

216 
223 
225 

231 
241 

248 

267 


THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES  (DEUTERONOMY). 

Introduction. 

Contents,  Arrangement,  and  Character  of  Deuteronomy,  .  .      269 


Exposition. 
Heading  and  Introduction  (Chap.  1.  1-5),  ....      277 

I.  The  First  Preparatory  Address  (Chap.  i.  6-iv.  40),     .  .  •      282 

Review  of  the  Divine  Guidance  of  Israel  from  Horeb  to  Kadesh 

(Chap.  i.  6-46), 284 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS.  VU 

Pago 
Review  of  the  Divine  Guidance  of  Israel  round  Edom  and  Moab  to 
the  Frontier  of  the  Amorites,  and  of  the  Gracious  Assistance 
afforded  by  tlie  Lord  in  the  Conquest  of  the  Kingdoms  of 
Sihon  and  Og  (Chap.  ii.  and  iii.),  .  .  •  .291 

Exhortation  to  a  Faithful  Observance  of  the  Law  (Chap.  iv.  1-40),        308 


318 


321 


n.    Second  Address,  or  Exposition  of  the  Law  (Chap.  iv.  41-xxvi. 

19), 

A.  The  True  Essence  of  the  Law  and  its  Fulfilment : — 

Exposition  of  the  Decalogue,  and  its  Promulgation  (Chap,  v.),        319 
On  Loving  Jehovah,  the  One  God,  with  all  the  Heart  (Chap. 

vi.), 

Command  to  destroy  the  Canaanites  and  their  Idolatry  (Chap. 

vii.), 32C 

Review  of  the  Guidance  of  God,  and  their  Humihation  in  the 
Desert,  as  a  Warning  against  Highmindedness  and  Forget- 
fulness  of  God  (Chap,  viii.),  ....      330 

Warning  against  Self -righteousness,  founded  upon  the  Recital 

of  their  previous  Sins  (Chap,  ix.-x.  11),     .  .  .      334 

Admonition  to  fear  and  love  God.  The  Blessing  or  Curse  con- 
sequent upon  the  Fulfilment  or  Transgression  of  the  Law 

(Chap.  x.  12-xi.  32), 343 

B.  Exposition  of  the  Principal  Laws  (Chap,  xii.-xxvi.),       .  .      351 

The  one  Place  for  the  Worship  of  God,  and  the  Right  Mode  of 

worshipping  Him  (Chap,  xii.),       ....       352 

Punishment  of  Idolaters,   and  Tempters  to  Idolatry  (Chap. 

xiii.),  .  .  .  ....       3G2 

Avoidance  of  the  Mourning  Customs  of  the  Heathen,  and  Un- 
clean Food.     Application  of  the  lithe  of  Fruits  (Chap. 

xiv.), 36G 

On  the  Year  of  Release,  the  Emancipation  of  Hebrew  Slaves, 
and  the  Sanctification  of  the  First-born  of  Cattle  (Chap. 

XV.), 369 

On  the  Celebration  of  the  Feasts  of  Passover,  of  Pentecost,  and 

of  Tabernacles  (Chap.  xvi.  1-17),  .  .  .  .374 

On  the  Administration  of  Justice  and  the  Choice  of  a  King 

(Chap.  xvi.  18-xvii.  20),    .  .  ,  .  .378 

Rights  of  the  Priests,  the  Levites,  and  the  Prophets  (Chap. 

xviii.),        .  .  .  .  .  .  •  .387 

Laws  concerning  the  Cities  of  Refuge,  the  Sacredncss  of  Land- 
marks, and  the  Punishment  of  False  Witnesses  (Chap, 
xix.), 397 


Vlil 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


Instructions  for  future  Wars  (Chap.  XX.),  .  .  .     "^^qq 

Expiation  of  an  uncertain  Murder.  Treatment  of  a  Wife  who 
had  been  taken  captive.  Right  of  the  First-born.  Punish- 
ment of  a  Refractory  Son.  Burial  of  a  Man  who  had  been 
hanged  (Chap,  xxi.),  .  .  .  ^  .404 

The  Duty  to  love  one's  Neighbour  ;  and  Warning  against  a 
Violation  of  the  Natural  Order  of  Things.  Instructions  to 
sanctify  the  Marriage  State  (Chap,  xxii.),  .  .       499 

Regulations  as  to  the  Right  of  Citizenship  in  the  Congregation 

of  the  Lord  (Chap,  xxiii.),  .  .  ,  .413 

On  Divorce.    Warnmgs  against  Want  of  Affection  or  Injustice 

(Chap,  xxiv.), .416 

Laws  relating  to  Corporal  Punishment;  Levirate  Marriages; 

and  Just  Weights  and  Measures  (Chap,  xxv.),       .  421 

Thanksgiving  and  Prayer  at  the  Presentation  of  First-fruits 

and  Tithes  (Chap,  xxvi.),  .  .  .  .  .425 

III.  Third  Discourse,  or  Renewal  of  the  Covenant  (Chap,  xxvii.-xxx.),  .  499 
On  the  setting  up  of  the  Law  in  the  Land  of  Canaan  (Chap,  xxvii.),  429 
Blessing  and  Curse  (Chap,  xxviii.  1-68),      .  .  .  .'435 

Conclusion  of  the  Covenant  in  the  Land  of  Moab  (Chap,  xxix  and 

^^^•^' .446 

lY.  Moses'  Farewell  and  Death  (Chap,  xxxi.-xxxiv.),    .  .  .       455 

Moses'  Final  Arrangements.     Completion  and  handing  over  of  the 

Book  of  the  Law  (Chap,  xxxi.),  .  .  ^  .455 

Song  of  Moses,  and  Announcement  of  his  Death  (Chap,  xxxii.),       .      464 
Moses'  Blessing  (Chap,  xxxiii.),         .  .  .  .      '       .       492 

Death  and  Burial  of  Moses  (Chap,  xxxiv.),  .  .  .  .514 

Concluding  Remarks  on  the  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch,  .      6I7 


THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

(NUMBERS.) 


INTRODUCTION. 
CONTENTS  AND  ARILVNGEMENT  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  NUMBERS. 


HE  fourth  book  of  Moses,  wliidi  the  Jews  call  eitlicr 
Vayedahher  (llT*"!),  from  the  opening  word,  DnSDQ  (Api6- 
fioij  Numeri,  LXX.,  Vulg.),  or  DH^pQ  recensiones  {=Uhcv 
recejisionum),  and  to  which  the  lieading  "imon  (in  the 
tcildemess)  is  given  in  the  Masoretic  texts  with  a  more  direct  refer- 
ence to  its  general  contents,  narrates  the  guidance  of  Israel  through 
the  desert,  from  Mount  Sinai  to  the  border  of  Canaan  by  the  river 
Jordan,  and  embraces  the  wliole  period  from  the  second  month  of 
the  second  year  after  the  exodus  from  Egypt  to  the  tenth  month  of 
the  fortieth  year. 

As  soon  as  their  mode  of  life  in  a  spiritual  point  of  view  had 
been  fully  regulated  by  the  laws  of  Leviticus,  the  Israelites  were  to 
enter  upon  their  journey  to  Canaan,  and  take  possession  of  the 
inheritance  promised  to  their  fathers.  But  just  as  the  way  from 
Goshen  to  Sinai  was  a  preparation  of  the  chosen  people  for  their 
reception  into  the  covenant  with  God,  so  the  way  from  Sinai  to 
Canaan  was  also  a  prepai'ation  for  the  possession  of  the  promised 
land.  On  their  journey  through  the  wilderness  the  Israelites  were 
to  experience  on  the  one  hand  the  faithful  watchfulness  and  gracious 
deliverance  of  their  God  in  every  season  of  distress  and  danger,  as 
v/ell  as  the  stern  severity  of  the  divine  judgments  upon  the  despisers 
of  their  God,  that  they  might  learn  thereby  to  trust  entirely  in  the 
Lord,  and  strive  after  His  kingdom  alone  ;  and  on  the  other  hand 
they  were  to  receive  during  their  journey  the  laws  and  ordinances 
relating  to  their  civil  and  political  constitution,  and  thereby  to  be 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  A 


2  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

placed  in  a  condition  to  form  and  maintain  themselves  as  a  consoli- 
dated nation  by  the  side  of  and  in  opposition  to  the  earthly  king- 
doms formed  by  the  nations  of  the  world,  and  to  fulfil  the  task 
assigned  them  by  God  in  the  midst  of  the  nations  of  the  earth. 
These  laws,  which  were  given  in  part  at  Sinai,  in  relation  to  the 
external  and  internal  organization  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  as  the  army 
and  the  congregation  of  Jehovah,  and  in  part  on  various  occasions 
during  the  march  through  the  desert,  as  well  as  after  their  arrival 
in  the  steppes  of  Moab,  on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan  opposite  to 
Jericho,  with  especial  reference  to  the  conquest  of  Canaan  and 
their  settlement  there,  are  not  only  attached  externally  to  the  his- 
tory itself  in  the  order  in  which  they  were  given,  but  are  so  incor- 
porated internally  into  the  historical  narrative,  according  to  their 
peculiar  character  and  contents,  as  to  form  a  complete  w^hole,  which 
divides  itself  into  three  distinct  parts  corresponding  to  the  chrono- 
logical development  of  the  history  itself. 

The  FIRST  part,  which  extends  from  chap.  i.-x.  10,  contains 
the  preparations  for  departing  from  Sinai,  arranged  in  four 
groups : — viz.  (1)  the  outward  arrangement  and  classification  of 
the  tribes  in  the  camp  and  on  their  march,  or  the  numbering  and 
grouping  of  the  twelve  tribes  around  the  sanctuary  of  their  God 
(chap.  i.  and  ii.),  and  the  appointment  of  the  Levites  in  the  place 
of  the  first-born  of  the  nation  to  act  as  servants  of  the  priests  in 
the  sanctuary  (chap.  iii.  and  iv.)  ;  (2)  the  internal  or  moral  and 
spiritual  organization  of  the  nation  as  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord,  by  laws  relating  to  the  maintenance  of  the  cleanliness  of  the 
camp,  restitution  for  trespasses,  conjugal  fidelity,  the  fulfilment  of 
the  vow  of  the  Nazarite,  and  the  priestly  blessing  (chap.  v.  and  vi.); 
(3)  the  closing  events  at  ^inai,  viz.  the  presentation  of  dedica- 
tory offerings  on  the  part  of  the  tribe  princes  for  the  transport  of 
the  tabernacle  and  the  altar  service  (chap,  vii.),  the  consecration 
of  the  Levites  (chap,  viii.),  and  the  feast  of  Passover,  with  an 
arrangement  for  a  supplementary  Passover  (chap.  ix.  1-14) ;  (4) 
the  appointment  of  signs  and  signals  for  the  march  in  the  desert 
(chap.  ix.  5-x.  10).  In  the  second  part  (chap.  x.  11-xxi.),  the 
history  of  the  journey  is  given  in  the  three  stages  of  its  progress 
from  Sinai  to  the  heights  of  Pisgah,  near  to  the  Jordan,  viz. 
(1)  from  their  departure  from  the  desert  of  Sinai  (chap.  x.  11-36) 
to  their  arrival  at  the  desert  of  Paran^  at  Kadesh,  including  the 
occurrences  at  Tabeerah,  at  the  graves  of  lust,  and  at  Hazeroth 
(chap.  xi.  and  :xii.),  and  the  events  at  Kadesh  which  led  God  to 


INTRODUCTION.  3 

condemn  the  people  who  had  revolted  against  Him  to  wander  in 
the  wilderness  for  forty  years,  until  the  older  generation  that  came 
out  of  Egypt  had  all  died  (chap.  xiii.  and  xiv.) ;  (2)  all  that  is 
related  of  the  execution  of  this  divine  judgment,  extending  from 
the  end  of  the  second  year  to  the  reassembling  of  the  congregation 
at  Kadesh  at  the  beginning  of  the  fortieth  year,  is  the  history  of 
the  rebellion  and  destruction  of  Korali  (chap,  xvi.-xvii.  15),  which 
is  preceded  by  laws  relating  to  the  offering  of  sacrifices  after  enter- 
ing Canaan,  to  the  punishment  of  blasphemers,  and  to  mementos 
upon  the  clothes  (chap,  xv.),  and  followed  by  the  divine  institution 
of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  (chap.  xvii.  16-28),  with  directions  as  to 
the  duties  and  rights  of  the  priests  and  Levites  (chap,  xviii.),  and 
the  law  concerning  purification  from  uncleanness  arising  from  con- 
tact with  the  dead  (chap,  xix.) ;  (3)  the  journey  of  Israel  in  the 
fortieth  year  from  Kadesh  to  Mount  Hor,  round  Mount  Seir,  past 
Moab,  and  through  the  territory  of  the  Amorites  to  the  heights  of 
Pisgah,  with  the  defeat  of  the  kings  of  the  Amorites,  Sihon  and 
Og,  and  the  conquest  of  their  kingdoms  in  Gilead  and  Bashan 
(chap.  XX.  and  xxi.).  In  the  thikd  part  (chap,  xxii.-xxxvi.),  the 
events  which  occurred  in  the  steppes  of  Moab,  on  the  eastern  side 
of  the  plain  of  Jordan,  are  gathered  into  five  groups,  with  the  laws 
that  were  given  there,  viz.  (1)  the  attempts  of  the  Moabites  and 
Midianites  to  destroy  the  people  of  Israel,  first  by  the  force  of 
Balaam's  curse,  which  was  turned  against  his  will  into  a  blessing 
(chap,  xxii.-xxiv.),  and  then  by  the  seduction  of  the  Israelites  to 
idolatry  (chap,  xxv.)  ;  (2)  the  fresh  numbering  of  the  people 
according  to  their  families  (chap,  xxvi.),  together  with  a  rule  for 
the  inheritance  of  landed  property  by  daughters  (chap.xxvii.  1-11)., 
and  the  appointment  of  Joshua  as  the  successor  of  Moses  (chap, 
xxvii.  12-23)  ;  (3)  laws  relating  to  the  sacrifices  to  be  offered  by 
the  congregation  on  the  Sabbath  and  feast  days,  and  to  the  binding 
character  of  vows  made  by  dependent  persons  (chap,  xxviii.-xxx.)  ; 
(4)  the  defeat  of  the  jMidianites  (chap,  xxxi.),  the  division  of  the 
land  that  had  been  conquered  on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan 
among  the  tribes  of  Keuben,  Gad,  and  half  Manasseh  (chap,  xxxii.), 
and  the  list  of  the  halting-places  (chap,  xxxiii.  1-49) ;  (5)  direc- 
tions as  to  the  expulsion  of  the  Canaanites,  the  conquest  of  Canaan 
and  division  of  it  among  the  tribes  of  Israel,  the  Levites  and  free 
cities,  and  the  marriage  of  heiresses  (chap,  xxxiii.  50-xxxvi.). 


4  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

EXPOSITION. 
I.  PREPARATIONS  FOR  THE  DEPARTURE  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  SINi 

Chap.  i.  1-x.  10. 
numbering  of  the  people  of  israel  at  sinai. — 

CHAP.  I.-IV. 

Four  weeks  after  the  erection  of  the  tabernacle  (cf.  cliap.  i.  1  and 
Ex.  xl.  17),  Moses  had  the  number  of  the  whole  congregation  taken, 
by  the  command  of  God,  according  to  the  families  and  fathers' 
houses  of  the  twelve  tribes,  and  a  list  made  of  all  the  males  above 
twenty  years  of  age  for  service  in  the  army  of  Jehovah  (chap.  i. 
1-3).  Nine  months  before,  the  numbering  of  the  people  had  taken 
2^1ace  for  the  purpose  of  collecting  atonement-money  from  every 
male  of  twenty  years  old  and  upwards  (Ex.  xxx.  11  sqq.,  compared 
with  chap,  xxxviii.  25,  26),  and  the  result  was  603,550,  the  same 
number  as  is  given  here  as  the  sum  of  all  that  were  mustered  in  the 
'  twelve  tribes  (chap.  i.  46).  This  correspondence  in  the  number  of 
the  male  population  after  the  lapse  of  a  year  is  to  be  explained,  as 
we  have  already  observed  at  Ex.  xxx.  16,  simply  from  the  fact  that 
the  result  of  the  previous  census,  which  was  taken  for  the  purpose 
of  raising  head-money  from  every  one  who  was  fit  for  w^ar,  was 
taken  as  the  basis  of  the  mustering  of  all  who  were  fit  for  war, 
which  took  place  after  the  erection  of  the  tabernacle ;  so  that, 
strictly  speaking,  this  mustering  merely  consisted  in  the  registering 
of  those  who  had  been  numbered  in  the  public  records,  according 
to  their  families  and  fathers'  houses.  It  is  most  probable,  however, 
that  the  numbering  and  registering  took  place  according  to  the 
classification  adopted  at  Jethro's  suggestion  for  the  administration 
of  justice,  viz.  in  thousands,  hundreds,  fifties,  and  tens  (Ex.  xviii. 
25),  and  that  the  number  of  men  in  the  different  tribes  was  reckoned 
in  this  way  simply  by  thousands,  hundreds,  and  tens, — a  conclusion 
which  we  may  draw  from  the  fact,  that  there  are  no  units  given  in 
the  case  of  any  of  the  tribes.  On  this  plan  the  supernumerary 
units  might  be  used  to  balance  the  changes  that  had  taken  place  in 
the  actual  condition  of  the  families  and  fathers'  houses,  between  the 
Qumbering  and  the  preparation  of  the  muster-rolls,  so  that  the  few 


CHAP.  I -IV.  5 

changes  that  had  occurred  in  the  course  of  nine  months  among  those 
who  were  fit  for  war  were  not  taken  any  further  into  consideration, 
on  account  of  their  being  so  inconsiderable  in  relation  to  the  total 
result.  A  fresh  census  was  taken  38  years  later  in  the  steppes  of 
Moab  (chap,  xxvi.),  for  the  division  of  the  land  of  Canaan  among 
the  tribes  according  to  the  number  of  their  families  (chap,  xxxiii. 
54).  The  number  which  this  gave  was  601,730  men  of  twenty 
years  old  and  upwards,  not  a  single  one  of  whom,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  Joshua  and  Caleb,  was  included  among  those  that  were 
mustered  at  Sinai,  because  the  whole  of  that  generation  had  died  in 
the  wilderness  (chap.  xxvi.  63  sqq.).  In  the  historical  account,  in- 
stead of  these  exact  numbers,  the  number  of  adult  males  is  given  in 
a  round  sum  of  600,000  (chap.  xi.  21;  Ex.  xii.  37).  To  this  the 
Lcvites  had  to  be  added,  of  whom  there  were  22,000  males  at  the 
first  numbering  and  23,000  at  the  second,  reckoning  the  whole  from 
a  month  old  and  upwards  T(chap.  iii.  39,  xxvi.  62).  Accordingly,  on 
the  precarious  supposition  that  the  results  obtained  from  the  official 
registration  of  births  and  deaths  in  our  own  day  furnish  any  ap- 
proximative standard  for  the  people  of  Israel,  who  had  grown  up 
under  essentially  different  territorial  and  historical  circumstances, 
the  whole  number  of  the  Israelites  in  the  time  of  Moses  would  have 
been  about  two  millions.^ 

Modern  critics  have  taken  offence  at  these  numbers,  though 
without  sufficient  reason.-     When  David  had  the  census  taken  by 

^  Statistics  show  that,  out  of  10,000  inhabitants  in  any  country,  about  5580 
arc  over  twenty  years  of  age  (cf.  Chr.  Bernoulli^  Ildb.  der  Fojmlationistik,  1841). 
This  is  the  case  in  Belgium,  where,  out  of  1000  inhabitants,  421  are  under 
twenty  years  of  age.  According  to  the  Danish  census  of  1840,  out  of  1000  in- 
habitants there  were — 

In  Denmark,  under  twenty  years  of  age,  432  ;  above  twenty,  5G8 
Schleswig,  „  „  436;  „  564 

Holsteiu,  „  „  460;  „  540 

Lauenburg,  ,,  ,,  458;  ,,  542 

According  to  this  standard,  if  there  were  600,000  males  in  Israel  above  twenty 
years  of  age,  there  would  be  in  all  1,000,000  or  1,100,000  males,  and  therefore, 
including  the  females,  more  than  two  millions. 

-  Knohcl  has  raised  the  following  objections  to  the  historical  truth  or  validity 
of  the  numbers  given  above  :  (1.)  So  large  a  number  could  not  possibly  have 
lived  for  any  considerable  time  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai,  as  modern  travellers 
estimate  the  present  population  at  not  more  than  from  four  to  seven  thousand, 
and  state  that  the  land  could  never  have  been  capable  of  sustaining  a  population 
of  50,000.  But  the  books  of  Moses  do  not  affirm  that  the  Israelites  lived  for 
forty  years  upon  the  natural  produce  of  the  desert,  but  that  they  were  fed  mira- 


6  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Joab,  in  the  closing  years  of  his  reign,  there  were  800,000  men 
capable  of  bearing  arms  in  Israel,  and  500,000  in  Judah  (2  Sam. 
xxiv.  9).  Now,  if  we  suppose  the  entire  population  of  a  country  to 
be  about  four  times  the  number  of  its  fighting  men,  there  would  be 

culously  with  manna  by  God  (see  at  Ex.  xvi.  31).  Moreover,  the  peninsula  of 
Sinai  yielded  much  more  subsistence  in  ancient  times  than  is  to  be  found  there 
at  present,  as  is  generally  admitted,  and  only  denied  by  Knobel  in  the  interests 
of  rationalism.  The  following  are  Ritter^s  remarks  in  his  Erdkunde^  14,  pp.  926-7 : 
"We  have  repeatedly  referred  above  to  the  earher  state  of  the  country,  which 
must  have  been  vastly  different  from  that  of  the  present  time.  The  abundant 
vegetation,  for  example ;  the  larger  number  of  trees,  and  their  superiority  in 
size,  the  destruction  of  which  would  be  followed  by  a  decrease  in  the  quantity 
of  smaller  shrubs,  etc. ;  also  the  greater  abundance  of  the  various  kinds  of  food 
of  which  the  children  of  Israel  could  avail  themselves  in  their  season  ;  the  more 
general  cultivation  of  the  land,  as  seen  in  the  monumental  period  of  the  earliest 
Egyptians,  viz.  the  period  of  their  mines  and  cities,  as  well  as  in  Christian 
times  in  the  wide-spread  remains  of  monasteries,  hermitages,  walls,  gardens, 
fields,  and  wells ;  and,  lastly,  the  possibility  of  a  better  employment  of  the  tem- 
porary flow  of  water  in  the  wadys,  and  of  the  rain,  which  falls  by  no  means 
unfrequently,  but  which  would  need  to  be  kept  with  dihgence  and  by  artificial 
means  for  the  unfruitful  periods  of  the  year,  as  is  the  case  in  other  districts  of 
the  same  latitude.  These  circumstances,  which  are  supported  by  the  numerous 
inscriptions  of  Sinai  and  Serbal,  together  with  those  in  the  Wady  I^Iokatteb  and 
a  hundred  other  valleys,  as  well  as  upon  rocky  and  mountainous  heights,  which 
are  now  found  scattered  in  wild  solitude  and  utter  neglect  throughout  the  whole 
of  the  central  group  of  mountains,  prove  that  at  one  time  a  more  numerous 
population  both  could  and  did  exist  there."  (2.)  "If  the  Israelites  had  been  a 
nation  of  several  millions  in  the  Mosaic  age,  with  their  bravery  at  that  time,  they 
would  have  conquered  the  small  land  more  easily  and  more  rapidly  than  they 
seem  to  have  done  according  to  the  accounts  in  the  books  of  Joshua,  Judges, 
and  Samuel,  which  show  that  they  were  obliged  to  tolerate  the  Canaanites  for 
a  long  time,  that  they  were  frequently  oppressed  by  them,  and  that  it  was  not 
till  the  time  of  David  and  Solomon  that  their  supremacy  was  completely  estab- 
lished." This  objection  of  KnoheVs  is  founded  upon  the  supposition  that  the 
tribes  of  Canaan  were  very  small  and  weak.  But  where  has  he  learned  that  ? 
As  they  had  no  less  than  31  kings,  according  to  Josh,  xii.,  and  dwelt  in  many 
hundreds  of  towns,  they  can  hardly  have  been  numerically  weaker  than  the 
Israehtes  with  their  600,000  men,  but  in  all  probability  were  considerably 
stronger  in  numbers,  and  by  no  means  inferior  in  bravery  ;  to  say  nothing  of  the 
fact  that  the  Israelites  neither  conquered  Canaan  under  Joshua  by  the  strength 
of  their  hands,  nor  failed  to  exterminate  them  afterwards  from  want  of  physical 
strength.  (3.)  Of  the  remaining  objections,  viz.  that  so  large  a  number  could 
not  have  gone  through  the  Arabian  Gulf  in  a  single  night,  or  crossed  the  Jordan 
in  a  day,  that  Joshua  could  not  have  circumcised  the  whole  of  the  males,  etc., 
the  first  has  been  answered  in  vol.  ii.  (pp.  46,  47),  by  a  proof  that  it  was  pos- 
sible for  the  Eed  Sea  to  be  crossed  in  the  given  time,  and  the  others  will  be 
answered  when  we  come  to  the  particular  events  referred  to. 


CHAP.  I -IV.  7 

about  five  millions  of  inhabitants  in  Palestine  at  that  time.  The 
area  of  this  land,  according  to  the  boundaries  given  in  chap,  xxxiv. 
2-12,  the  whole  of  which  was  occupied  by  Israel  and  Judah  in  the 
time  of  David,  with  the  exception  of  a  small  strip  of  the  Phoenician 
coast,  was  more  than  500  square  miles.^  Accordingly  there  would 
be  10,000  inhabitants  to  each  square  mile  (German)  ;  a  dense  though 
by  no  means  unparalleled  population;^  so  that  it  is  certainly  pos- 
sible that  in  the  time  of  Christ  it  may  have  been  more  numerous 
still,  according  to  the  accounts  of  JosepJms,  which  are  confirmed  by 
Dio  Cassius  (cf.  C.  v.  Ranmer,  Paldstina,  p.  93).  And  if  Canaan 
could  contain  and  support  five  millions  of  inhabitants  in  the  flourish- 
ing period  of  the  Israelitish  kingdom,  two  millions  or  more  could 
easily  have  settled  and  been  sustained  in  the  time  of  Joshua  and  the 
Judges,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  there  still  remained  large 
tracts  of  land  in  the  possession  of  the  Canaanites  and  Philistines, 
and  that  the  Israelites  dwelt  in  the  midst  of  the  Canaanitish  popu- 
lation which  had  not  yet  been  entirely  eradicated  (Judg.  iii.  1-5). 

If  we  compare  together  the  results  of  the  two  numberings  in 
the  second  and  fortieth  years  of  their  march,  we  shall  find  a  con- 
siderable increase  in  some  of  the  tribes,  and  a  large  decrease  in 
others.  The  number  of  men  of  twenty  years  old  and  upwards  in 
the*  different  tribes  was  as  follows  : — 


Reuben,    . 
Simeon,    . 
Gad,     .     . 
Judah, 
Issacliar,   . 
Zebulon,  . 
Ephraim, 
Manasseh, 
Benjamin, 
Dan,     .     . 
Asher, 
Naphtali, 

Total, 


First  Numbering. 

Second  Numbering 

46,500 

43,730 

59,800 

22,200 

45,650 

40,500 

74,600 

76,500 

54,400 

64,300 

57,400 

60,500 

40,500 

32,500 

32,200 

52,700 

35,400 

45,600 

62,700 

64,400 

41,500 

53,400 

53,400 

45,400 

603,550 


601,730 


Consequently  by  the  second  numbering  Dan  had  increased  1700, 

^  The  German  mile  being  equal  to  about  five  English  miles,  this  would  give 
12,500  square  miles  English. 

2  In  the  kingdom  of  Saxony  (according  to  the  census  of  the  year  1855)  there 
arc  7501  persons  to  the  square  mile ;  in  Belgium  (according  to  the  census  of 


a  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Judah  1900,  Zebulon  3100,  Issachar  9900,  Benjamin  10,200, 
Asher  11,900,  Manasseli  20,900.  This  increase,  which  was  about 
19  per  cent,  in  the  case  of  Issachar,  29  per  cent,  in  that  of  Ben- 
jamin and  Asher,  and  63  per  cent,  in  that  of  Manasseh,  is  very 
large,  no  doubt ;  but  even  that  of  Manasseh  is  not  unparalleled. 
The  total  population  of  Prussia  increased  from  10,349,031  to 
17,139,288  between  the  end  of  1816  and  the  end  of  1855,  that 
is  to  say,  more  than  65  per  cent,  in  39  years ;  w  hilst  in  England 
the  population  increased  47  per  cent,  between  1815  and  1849, 
i,e.  in  34  years.  On  the  other  hand,  there  was  a  decrease  in 
Eeuben  of  2770,  in  Gad  of  5150,  in  Ephraim  of  8000,  in  Naph- 
tali  of  8000,  and  in  Simeon  of  37,100.  The  cause  of  this  dimi- 
nution of  6  per  cent,  in  the  case  of  Eeuben,  12  per  cent,  in  Gad, 
15  per  cent,  in  Naphtali,  20  per  cent,  in  Ephraim,  and  nearly 
63  per  cent,  in  Simeon,  it  is  most  natural  to  seek  for  in  the 
different  judgments  which  fell  upon  the  nation.  If  it  be  true,  as 
the  earlier  commentators  conjectured,  with  great  plausibility,  on 
account  of  the  part  taken  by  Zimri,  a  prince  of  the  tribe  (chap. 
XXV.  6,  14),  that  the  Simeonites  were  the  w^orst  of  those  who  joined 
in  the  idolatrous  worship  of  Baal  Peor,  the  plague,  in  which  24,000 
men  were  destroyed  (chap.  xxv.  9),  would  fall  upon  them  with 
greater  severity  than  upon  the  other  tribes ;  and  this  would  serve 
as  the  principal  explanation  of  the  circumstance,  that  in  the  census 
which  was  taken  immediately  afterwards,  the  number  of  men  in 
that  tribe  who  were  capable  of  bearing  arms  had  melted  away  to 
22j200.  But  for  all  that,  the  total  number  included  in  the  census 
had  only  been  reduced  by  1820  men  during  the  forty  years  of  their 
journeying  through  the  wilderness. 

The  tribe  of  Levi  appears  very  small  in  comparison  with  the 
rest  of  the  tribes.  In  the  second  year  of  their  journey,  when  the 
first  census  was  taken,  it  only  numbered  22,000  males  of  a  month 
old  and  upwards ;  and  in  the  fortieth  year,  when  the  second  was 
taken,  only  23,000  (chap.  iii.  39,  xxvi.  62).     "  Eeckoning,"  says 

1856)  8462 ;  and  in  the  district  of  Diisseldorf  there  are  98*32  square  miles  and 
(according  to  the  census  of  1855)  1,007,570  inhabitants,  so  that  there  must  bo 
10,248  persons  to  the  square  mile.  Consequently,  not  only  could  more  than  five 
millions  have  lived  in  Palestine,  but,  if  we  take  into  account  on  the  one  hand 
what  is  confirmed  by  both  biblical  and  other  testimonies,  viz.  the  extraordinary- 
fertility  of  the  land  in  ancient  times  (cf.  r.  Bainner,  Pal.  pp.  92  sqq.),  and  on 
the  other  hand  the  well-known  fact  that  the  inhabitants  of  warm  countries 
require  less  food  than  Europeans  living  in  colder  climates,  they  could  also  have 
found  a  sufficient  supply  of  food. 


CHAP.  I.-IV.  9 

Knohel,  "  that  in  Belgium,  for  example,  in  the  rural  districts,  out  of 
10,000  males,  1074  die  in  the  first  month  after  their  birth,  and  3684: 
between  the  first  month  and  the  twentieth  year,  so  that  only  5242 
are  then  alive,  the  tribe  of  Levi  would  only  number  about  13,000 
men  of  20  years  old  and  upwards,  and  consequently  would  not  be 
half  as  numerous  as  the  smallest  of  the  other  tribes,  whilst  it  would 
be  hardly  a  sixth  part  the  size  of  Judah,  which  was  the  strongest 
of  the  tribes."  But  notwithstanding  this,  the  correctness  of  the 
numbers  given  is  not  to  be  called  in  question.  It  is  not  only  sup- 
ported by  the  fact,  that  the  number  of  the  Levites  capable  of  service 
between  the  ages  of  30  and  50  amounted  to  8580  (chap.  iv.  48), — 
a  number  which  bears  the  most  perfect  proportion  to  that  of  22,000 
of  a  month  old  and  upwards, — but  is  also  confirmed  by  the  fact^ 
that  in  the  time  of  David  the  tribe  of  Levi  only  numbered  38,000 
of  thirty  years  old  and  upwards  (1  Chron.  xxiii.  3)  ;  so  that  in  the 
interval  between  Moses  and  David  their  rate  of  increase  was  still 
below  that  of  the  other  tribes,  which  had  grown  from  600,000  to 
1,300,000  in  the  same  time.  Now,  if  we  cannot  discover  any  reason 
for  this  smaller  rate  of  increase  in  the  tribe  of  Levi,  we  see,  at  any 
rate,  that  it  was  not  uniform  in  the  other  tribes.  If  Levi  was  not  half 
as  strong  as  Manasseh  in  the  first  numbering,  neither  Manasseh  nor 
Benjamin  was  half  as  strong  as  Judah  ;  and  in  the  second  number- 
ing, even  Ephraim  had  not  half  the  number  of  men  that  Judah  had. 
A  much  greater  difficulty  appears  to  lie  in  the  fact,  that  the 
number  of  all  the  male  first-born  of  the  twelve  tribes,  which  was 
only  22,273  according  to  the  census  taken  for  the  purpose  of  their 
redemption  by  the  Levites  (chap.  iii.  43),  bore  no  kind  of  propor- 
tion to  the  total  number  of  men  capable  of  bearing  arms  in  the 
whole  of  the  male  population,  as  calculated  from  these.  If  the 
603,550  men  of  twenty  years  old  and  upwards  presuppose,  accord- 
ing to  what  has  been  stated  above,  a  population  of  more  than  a 
million  males ;  then,  on  the  assumption  that  22,273  was  the  sum  total 
of  the  first-born  sons  throughout  the  entire  nation,  there  would  be 
only  one  first-born  to  40  or  45  males,  and  consequently  every  father 
of  a  family  must  have  begotten,  or  still  have  had,  from  39  to  44 
sons  ;  whereas  the  ordinary  proportion  of  first-born  sons  to  the 
whole  male  population  is  one  to  four.  But  the  calculation  which 
yields  this  enormous  disproportion,  or  rather  this  inconceivable  pro- 
portion, is  founded  upon  the  supposition  that  the  law,  which  com- 
manded the  sanctification  of  the  male  first-born,  had  a  retrospective 
force,  and  was  to  bs  understood  as  requiring  that  not  only  the  first- 


10  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

born  sons,  who  were  born  from  the  time  when  the  law  was  given, 
but  all  the  first-born  sons  throughout  the  entire  nation,  should 
offered  to  the  Lord  and  redeemed  with  five  shekels  each,  even? 
though  they  were  fathers  or  grandfathers,  or  even  great-grand- 
fathers, at  that  time.  Now  if  the  law  is  to  be  interpreted  in  this 
sense,  as  having  a  retrospective  force,  and  applying  to  those  who 
were  born  before  it  was  issued,  as  it  has  been  from  the  time  of 
J.  D.  Michaelis  down  to  that  of  Knobelj  it  is  an  unwarrantable 
liberty  to  restrict  its  application  to  the  first-born  sons,  who  had  not 
yet  become  fathers  themselves, — a  mere  subterfuge,  in  fact,  invented 
for  the  purpose  of  getting  rid  of  the  disproportion,  but  without 
answering  the  desired  end.^  If  we  look  more  closely  at  the  law,  we 
cannot  find  in  the  words  themselves  "  all  the  first-born,  whatsoever 

^  This  is  evident  from  the  different  attempts  which  have  been  made  to  get 
rid  of  the  difficulty,  in  accordance  with  this  hypothesis.  /.  D.  Michaelis 
thought  that  he  could  explain  the  disproportion  from  the  prevalence  of  poly- 
gamy among  the  Israelites ;  but  he  has  overlooked  the  fact,  that  polygamy 
never  prevailed  among  the  Israelites,  or  any  other  people,  with  anything  like 
the  universality  which  this  would  suppose.  HavernicJc  adopted  this  view,  but 
differed  so  far  from  Michaelis^  that  he  understood  by  first-lorn  only  those  who 
were  so  on  both  the  father's  and  mother's  side, — a  supposition  which  does  not 
remove  the  difficulty,  but  only  renders  it  perfectly  incredible.  Others  ima- 
gined, that  only  those  first-born  were  counted  who  had  been  born  as  the  result 
of  marriages  contracted  within  the  last  six  years.  Baumgarten  supports  this  on 
the  ground  that,  according  to  Lev.  xxvii.  6,  the  redemption-fee  for  boys  of  this 
age  was  five  shekels  (chap.  iii.  47)  ;  but  this  applies  to  vows,  and  proves 
nothing  in  relation  to  first-born,  who  could  not  have  been  th6  object  of  a  vow 
(IjCV.  xxvii.  26).  Bunsen  comes  to  the  same  conclusion,  on  the  ground  that  it  was 
at  this  age  that  children  were  generally  dedicated  to  Moloch  {sic!).  Lastly, 
Kurtz  endeavours  to  solve  the  difficulty,  first,  by  referring  to  the  great  fruitful- 
ness  of  the  Israelitish  women ;  secondly,  by  excluding,  (a)  the  first-born  of  the 
father,  unless  at  the  same  time  the  first-born  of  the  mother  ;  (6)  all  the  first- 
born who  were  fathers  of  families  themselves  ;  and  thirdly,  by  observing,  that 
in  a  population  of  600,000  males  above  20  years  of  age,  we  may  assume  that 
there  would  be  about  200,000  under  the  age  of  fifteen.  Now,  if  we  deduct 
these  200,000  who  were  not  yet  fifteen,  from  the  600,000  who  were  above 
twenty,  there  would  remain  400,000  married  men.  "  In  that  case  the  total 
number  of  22,273  first-born  would  yield  this  proportion,  that  there  would  be 
one  first-born  to  nine  male  births.  And  on  the  ground  assigned  under  No.  2  (a), 
this  proportion  would  have  to  be  reduced  one-half.  So  that  for  every  family 
we  should  have,  on  an  average,  four  or  five  sons,  or  nine  children, — a  result  by 
no  means  surprising,  considering  the  fruitfuluess  of  Hebrew  marriages."  This 
would  be  undoubtedly  true,  and  the  facit  of  the  calculation  quite  correct,  as 
9  X  22,278  =  200,457,  if  only  the  subtraction  upon  which  it  is  based  were  recon- 
cilable with  the  rules  of  arithmetic,  or  if  the  reduction  of  600,000  men  to 
400,000  could  in  any  way  be  justified. 


CHAP.  I.-I\'.  11 

openeth  the  womb"  (Ex.  xiii.  2,  cf.  Num.  iil.  12),  or  in  the  ratio 
legisy  or  in  the  circumstances  under  which  the  law  was  given,  either 
a  nrjcessity  or  warrant  for  any  such  explanation  or  extension.  Ac- 
cording to  Ex.  xiii.  2,  after  the  institution  of  the  Passover  and  its 
first  commemoration,  God  gave  the  command,  "  Sanctify  unto  Me 
all  the  first-born  both  of  man  and  of  beast ;"  and  added,  according 
to  vers.  11  sqq.,  the  further  explanation,  that  when  the  Israelites 
came  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  they  were  to  set  apart  every  first- 
born unto  the  Lord,  but  to  redeem  their  first-born  sons.  This 
further  definition  places  it  beyond  all  doubt,  that  what  God  pre- 
scribed to  His  people  was  not  a  supplementary  sanctification  of  all 
the  male  first-born  who  were  then  to  be  found  in  Israel,  but  simply 
the  sanctification  of  all  that  should  be  born  from  that  time  forward. 
A  confirmation  of  this  is  to  be  found  in  the  explanation  given  in 
Num.  iii.  13  and  viii.  17  :  "  All  the  first-born  are  Mine  ;  for  on  the 
day  that  I  smote  all  the  first-born  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  I  hallowed 
unto  Me  all  the  first-born  in  Israel,  both  man  and  beast."  According 
to  this  distinct  explanation,  God  had  actually  sanctified  to  Himself 
all  the  first-bom  of  Israel  by  the  fact,  that  through  the  blood  of 
the  paschal  lamb  He  granted  protection  to  His  people  from  the 
stroke  of  the  destroyer  (Ex.  xii.  22,  23),  and  had  instituted  the 
Passover,  in  order  that  He  might  therein  adopt  the  whole  nation  of 
Israel,  with  all  its  sons,  as  the  people  of  His  possession,  or  induct 
the  nation  which  He  had  chosen  as  His  first-born  son  (Ex.  iv.  22) 
into  the  condition  of  a  child  of  God.  This  condition  of  sonship 
was  henceforth  to  be  practically  manifested  by  the  Israelites,  not 
only  by  the  yearly  repetition  of  the  feast  of  Passover,  but  also  by 
the  presentation  of  all  the  male  first-bom  of  their  sons  and  their 
cattle  to  the  Lord,  the  first-born  of  the  cattle  being  sacrificed  to 
Him  upon  the  altar,  and  the  first-born  sons  being  redeemed  from 
the  obligation  resting  upon  them  to  serve  at  the  sanctuary  of  their 
God.  Of  course  the  reference  was  only  to  the  first-born  of  men 
and  cattle  that  should  come  into  the  world  from  that  time  forward, 
and  not  to  those  whom  God  had  already  sanctified  to  Himself,  by 
sparing  the  Israelites  and  their  cattle.^ 

^  Vitringa  drew  the  correct  conclusion  from  Ex.  xiii.  11,  12,  in  combination 
with  the  fact  that  this  law  was  not  carried  out  previous  tp  the  adoption  of  the 
Levites  in  the  place  of  the  first-bom  for  service  at  the  sanctuary — that  the  law 
was  intended  chiefly  for  the  future  :  "  This  law,"  he  observes  (in  his  Obs.  ss.  L. 
ii.  c.  2,  §  13),  "relates  to  the  tabernacle  to  be  afterwards  erected,  and  to  the 
regular  priests  to  be  solemnly  appointed ;  when  this  law,  with  many  others  of  a 


12  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

This  being  established,  it  follows  that  the  22,273  first-born,  who 
were  exchanged  for  the  Levites  (ch.  iii.  45  sqq.),  consisted  only  oi 
the  first-born  sons  who  had  been  born  between  the  time  of  the 
exodus  from  Egypt  and  the  numbering  of  the  twelve  tribes,  which 
took  place  thirteen  months  afterwards.  Now,  if,  in  order  to  form  an 
idea  of  the  proportion  which  this  number  would  bear  to  the  whole 
of  the  male  population  of  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel,  we  avail  our- 
selves of  the  results  furnished  by  modern  statistics,  we  may  fairly 
assume,  according  to  these,  that  in  a  nation  comprising  603,550 
males  above  20  years  of  age,  there  would  be  190,000  to  195,100 
between  the  ages  of  20  and  30.^  And,  supposing  that  this  was 
the  age  at  which  the  Israelites  married,  there  would  be  from 
19,000  to  19,500  marriages  contracted  upon  an  average  every  year  ; 
and  in  a  nation  which  had  grown  up  in  a  land  so  celebrated  as 
Egypt  was  in  antiquity  for  the  extraordinary  fruitfulness  of  its  in- 
habitants, almost  as  many  first-born,  say  at  least  19,000,  might  be 
expected  to  come  into  the  world.  This  average  number  would  be 
greater  if  we  fixed  the  age  for  marrying  between  18  and  28,  or 
reduced  it  to  the  seven  years  between  18  and  25<r  But  even  with- 
out doing  this,  we  must  take  into  consideration  the  important  fact 
that  such  averages,  based  upon  a  considerable  length  of  time,  only 
give  an  approximative  idea  of  the  actual  state  of  things  in  any 
single  year ;  and  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  in  years  of  oppression  and 
distress  the  numbers  may  sink  to  half  the  average,  whilst  in  other 

similar  kind,  would  have  to  be  observed.  The  first-born  were  set  apart  by  God  to 
be  consecrated  to  Him,  as  servants  of  the  priests  and  of  the  sacred  things,  either 
in  their  own  persons,  or  in  that  of  others  who  were  afterwards  substituted 
in  the  goodness  of  God.  This  command  therefore  presupposed  the  erection  of 
the  tabernacle,  the  ordination  of  priests,  the  building  of  an  altar,  and  the  cere- 
monial of  the  sacred  service,  and  showed  from  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  that 
there  could  not  be  any  application  of  this  law  of  the  first-born  before  that  time." 

^  According  to  the  census  of  the  town  of  Basle,  given  by  Bernoulli  in  his 
Populationisiik,  p.  42,  and  classified  by  age,  out  of  1000  inhabitants  in  tlie  year 
1837,  there  were  326  under  20  years  of  age,  22-4  between  20  and  30,  and  450  of 
30  years  old  and  upwards.  Kow,  if  we  apply  this  ratio  to  the  people  of  Israel, 
out  of  603,550  males  of  20  years  old  and  upwards,  there  would  be  197,653 
between  the  ages  of  20  and  30.  The  statistics  of  the  city  of  Vienna  and  its 
suburbs,  as  given  by  Brachelli  (GeograpJiie  vnd  Statistik,  1861),  yield  very 
nearly  the  same  results.  At  the  end  of  the  year  1856  there  were  88,973  male 
inhabitants  under  20  years  of  age,  44,000  between  20  and  30,  and  97,853  of  30 
years  old  and  upwards,  not  including  the  military  and  those  who  were  in  hos- 
pitals. According  to  this  ratio,  out  of  the  603,550  Israelites  above  20  years  of 
age,  187,209  would  be  between  20  and  30. 

^  From  a  comparison  with  the  betrothals  which  take  place  every  year  in 


I 


CHAP.  I.-IV.  13 

years,  under  peculiarly  favourable  circumstances,  tliey  may  rise 
again  to  double  the  amount.^  When  the  Israelites  were  groaning 
under  the  hard  lash  of  the  Egyptian  taskmasters,  and  then  under 
the  inhuman  and  cruel  edict  of  Pharaoh,  which  commanded  all  the 
Plebrew  boys  that  were  born  to  be  immediately  put  to  death,  the 
number  of  marriages  no  doubt  diminished  from  year  to  year.  But 
the  longer  this  oppression  continued,  the  greater  would  be  the 
number  of  marriages  concluded  at  once  (especially  in  a  nation 
rejoicing  in  the  promise  of  numerous  increase  which  it  had  re- 
ceived from  its  God),  when  Moses  had  risen  up  and  proved  himself, 
by  the  mighty  signs  and  wonders  with  which  he  smote  Egypt  and 
its  haughty  king,  to  be  the  man  whom  the  God  of  the  fathers  had 
sent  and  endowed  with  power  to  redeem  His  nation  out  of  the 
bondage  of  Egypt,  and  lead  it  into  Canaan,  the  good  land  that  He 
had  promised  to  the  fathers.  At  that  time,  when  the  spirits  of  the 
nation  revived,  and  the  hope  of  a  glorious  future  filled  every  heart, 
there  might  very  well  have  been  about  38,000  marriages  contracted  in 
a  year,  say  from  the  time  of  the  seventh  plague,  three  months  before 
the  exodus,  and  about  37,600  children  born  by  the  second  month 
of  the  second  year  after  the  exodus,  22,273  of  them  being  boys,  as 
the  proportion  of  male  births  to  female  varies  very  remarkably,  and 
may  be  shown  to  have  risen  even  as  high  as  157  to  100,  whilst 
among  the  Jews  of  modern  times  it  has  frequently  been  as  high  as 
6  to  5,  and  has  even  risen  to  3  to  2  (or  more  exactly  29  to  20).^ 

the  Prussian  state,  it  is  evident  that  the  number  given  in  the  text  as  the  average 
number  of  marriages  contracted  every  year  is  not  too  high,  but  most  assuredly 
too  low.  In  the  year  1858  there  were  167,387  bctrotlials  in  a  population  of 
17,793,900  ;  in  181G,  on  the  other  hand,  there  were  117,448  in  a  population  of, 
10,402,600  (vid.  Brachelli,  Geog.  und  Statistik  von  Prcussen,  1861).  The  first 
ratio,  if  applied  to  Israel  with  its  two  millions,  would  yield  19,000  marriages 
annually  ;  the  second,  22,580  ;  whilst  we  have,  in  addition,  to  bear  in  mind  how 
many  men  there  are  in  the  European  states  who  would  gladly  marry,  if  they 
were  not  prevented  from  doing  so  by  inability  to  find  the  means  of  supporting 
a  house  of  their  own. 

^  How  great  the  variations  are  in  the  number  of  marriages  contracted  year 
by  year,  even  in  large  states  embracing  different  tribes,  and  when  no  unusual 
circumstances  have  disturbed  the  ordinary  course  of  things,  is  evident  from 
the  statistics  of  the  Austrian  empire  as  given  by  BracJtelli,  from  which  we  may 
see  that  in  the  year  1851,  with  a  total  population  of  36^  millions,  there  were 
361,249  betrothals,  and  in  the  year  1854,  when  the  population  had  increased 
by  half  a  million,  only  279,802.  The  variations  in  particular  districts  are,  as 
might  be  supposed,  considerably  larger. 

2  According  to  Bernoulli  (p.  143),  in  the  city  of  Geneva,  there  were  157  bojrs 
born  to  every  100  girls  in  the  year  1832.     He  also  observes,  at  p.  153  :  "  It  is 


FOURTH  ROOK  OF  MOSES, 

In  this  way  the  problem  before  us  may  be  solved  altogether 
independently  of  the  question,  whether  the  law  relates  to  all  tlie  first- 
born sons  on  the  father's  side,  or  only  to  those  who  were  first-born 
on  both  father's  and  mother's  side,  and  without  there  having  been 
a  daughter  born  before.  This  latter  view  we  regard  as  quite  un- 
founded, as  a  mere  subterfuge  resorted  to  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
moving the  supposed  disproportion,  and  in  support  of  which  the 
expression  "  opening  the  womb"  (fissura  uteri,  i.e.  qidfindit  uterum) 
is  pressed  in  a  most  unwarrantable  manner.  On  this  point,  J.  D. 
Mickaelis  has  correctly  observed,  that  "the  etymology  ought  not 
to  be  too  strongly  pressed,  inasmuch  as  it  is  not  upon  this,  but 
upon  usage  chiefly,  that  the  force  of  words  depends."  It  is  a  fact 
common  to  all  languages,  that  in  many  words  the  original  literal 
signification  falls  more  and  more  into  the  background  in  the  course 
of  years,  and  at  length  is  gradually  lost  sight  of  altogether.  More- 
over, the  expression  "  openeth  the  womb"  is  generally  employed  in 
cases  in  which  a  common  term  is  required  to  designate  the  first-born 
of  both  man  and  beast  (Ex.  xiii.  2,  12-15,  xxxiv.  19,  20 ;  Num. 
iii.  12,  13,  viii.  16,  17,  xviii.  15 ;  Ezek.  xx.  16) ;  but  even  then, 
wherever  the  two  are  distinguished,  the  term  ">i33  is  applied  as  a 
rale  to  the  first-born  sons,  and  "it3S  to  the  first-born  of  animals 
(comp.  Ex.  xiii.  136  with  vers.  12  and  loa  ;  and  chap,  xxxiv. 
206  with  vers.  19  and  20a).  On  the  other  hand,  where  only  first- 
born sons  are  referred  to,  as  in  Deut.  xxi.  15-17,  we  look  in  vain 
for  the  expression  peter  rechernj  "  openeth  the  womb."  Again,  the 
Old  Testament,  like  modern  law,  recognises  only  first-born  sons,  and 
does  not  apply  the  term  first-born  to  daughters  at  all ;  and  in  rela- 
tion to  the  inheritance,  even  in  the  case  of  two  wives,  both  of  whom 
had  born  sons  to  their  husband,  it  recognises  only  one  first-born  son, 
so  that  the  fact  of  its  being  the  first  birth  on  the  mother's  side  is 
not  taken  into  consideration  at  all  (cf.  Gen.  xlvi.  8,  xlix.  3  ;  Deut. 
xxi.  15-17).  And  the  established  rule  in  relation  to  the  birth- 
right,— namely,  that  the  first  son  of  the  father  was  called  the  first- 
born, and  possessed  all  the  rights  of  the  first-born,  independently 

remarkable  that,  according  to  a  very  frequent  observation,  there  are  an  unusual 
number  of  boys  born  among  the  Jews ;  "  and  as  a  proof,  he  cites  the  fact  that, 
according  to  Burdach,  the  lists  of  births  in  Leghorn  show  120  male  children 
born  among  the  Jews  to  100  female,  whilst,  according  to  Huf eland,  there  were 
528  male  Jews  and  365  female  born  in  Berlin  in  the  course  of  16  years,  the  pro- 
portion therefore  being  145  to  100.  And,  according  to  this  same  proportion, 
we  have  calculated  above,  that  there  would  be  15,327  girls  to  22,273  boys. 


CHAP.  I.  1-16.  15 

altogether  of  the  question  whether  there  had  been  daughters  born 
before, — would  no  doubt  be  equally  applicable  to  the  sanctincation 
of  the  first-born  sons.  Or  are  we  really  to  believe,  that  inas- 
much as  the  child  first  born  is  quite  as  often  a  girl  as  a  boy,  God 
exempted  eveiy  father  in  Israel  whose  eldest  child  was  a  daughter 
from  the  obligation  to  manifest  his  own  sonship  by  consecrating 
his  first-born  son  to  God,  and  so  demanded  the  performance  of  this 
duty  from  half  the  nation  only  ?  We  cannot  for  a  moment  believe 
that  such  an  interpretation  of  the  law  as  this  would  really  be  in 
accordance  with  the  spirit  of  the  Old  Testament  economy. 

Chap.  i.  ^luSTER  OF  THE  TWELVE  TrIBES,  WITH  THE  EX- 
CEPTION OF  THAT  OF  Levi. — Vers.  1-3.  Before  the  departure  of 
Israel  from  Sinai,  God  commanded  Moses,  on  the  first  of  the  second 
month  in  the  second  year  after  the  exodus  from  Egypt,  to  take  the 
number  of  the  whole  congregation  of  the  children  of  Israel,  "  ac- 
cording to  their  families,  according  to  their  fathers^  houses  (see  Ex, 
vi.  14),  in  (according  to)  the  number  of  their  names,^  i.e.  each  one 
counted  singly  and  entered,  but  only  "  every  male  according  to  their 
heads  of  twenty  years  old  and  upwards^  (see  Ex.  xxx.  14),  viz.  only 
t<2V  fc<.f^"P3  "  all  who  go  forth  of  the  army^^  i.e.  all  the  men  capable 
of  bearing  arms,  because  by  means  of  this  numbering  the  tribes 
and  their  subdivisions  were  to  be  organized  as  hosts  of  Jehovah, 
that  the  whole  congregation  might  fight  as  an  army  for  the  cause 
of  their  Lord  (see  at  Ex.  vii.  4). 

Vers.  4-16.  Moses  and  Aaron,  who  were  commanded  to  num- 
ber, or  rather  to  muster,  the  people,  were  to  have  with  them  "  a  man 
of  every  tribe,  who  was  head-man  of  his  fathers^  Jiouses"  i.e.  a  tribe- 
prince,  viz.  to  help  them  to  carry  out  the  mustering.  Beth  aboth 
("fathers'  houses"),  in  ver.  2,  is  a  technical  expression  for  the  sub- 
divisions in  which  the  mishpachoth,  or  families  of  the  tribes,  were 
arranged,  and  is  applied  in  ver.  4  according  to  its  original  usage, 
based  upon  the  natural  division  of  the  tribes  into  mishpachoth  and 
families,  to  the  fathers'  houses  which  every  tribe  possessed  in  the 
family  of  its  first-born.  In  vers.  5-15,  these  heads  of  tribes  are 
mentioned  by  name,  as  in  chap.  ii.  3  sqq.,  vii.  12  sqq.,  x.  14  sqq. 
In  ver.  16  they  are  designated  as  "  called  men  of  the  congregatioii,^^ 
because  they  were  called  to  diets  of  the  congregation,  as  represen- 
tatives of  the  tribes,  to  regulate  the  affairs  of  the  nation  ;  also 
^^ princes  of  the  tribes  of  their  fathers^^  and  "  heads  of  the  thour- 
sands  of  Israel :^^  ^^ princes"  from  the  nobility  of  their  birth;  and 


16  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

'^  heads, ^^  as  chiefs  of  the  alaphim  composing  the  tribes.  Alaphim 
is  equivalent  to  mishpachoth  (cf.  chap.  x.  4  ;  Josh.  xxii.  14)  ;  be- 
cause the  number  of  heads  of  families  in  the  mishpachoth  of  a  tribe 
might  easily  amount  to  a  thousand  (see  at  Ex.  xviii.  2b),  In  a 
similar  manner,  the  term  "  hundred''^  in  the  old  German  came  to  be 
used  in  several  different  senses  (see  Gnmin,  deutsche  Rechts-alter- 
thiimer,  p.  532). 

Vers.  17-47.  This  command  was  carried  out  by  Moses  and 
Aaron.  They  took  for  this  purpose  the  twelve  heads  of  tribes  who 
are  pointed  out  (see  at  Lev.  xxiv.  11)  by  name,  and  had  the  whole 
congregation  gathered  together  by  them  and  enrolled  in  genealogical 
tables.  "'?!n'?j  to  announce  themselves  as  horn,  i.e.  to  have  themselves 
entered  in  genealogical  registers  (books  of  generations).  This 
entiy  is  called  a  ^i?S,  mustering,  in  ver.  19,  etc.  In  vers.  20-43  the 
number  is  given  of  those  who  were  mustered  of  all  the  different 
tribes,  and  in  vers.  44-47  the  total  of  the  whole  nation,  with  the 
exception  of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  ^*  Their  generations^''  (vers.  20,  22, 
24,  etc.),  i.e.  those  who  were  begotten  by  them,  so  that  "  the  sons 
of  Reuben,  Simeon^^  etc.,  are  mentioned  as  the  fathers  from  whom 
the  mishpachoth  and  fathers'  houses  had  sprung.  The  P  before 
jtoK^'  ''J3  in  ver.  22,  and  the  following  names  (in  vers.  24,  26,  etc.), 
signifies  "  with  regard  to  "  (as  in  Isa.  xxxii.  1 ;  Ps.  xvii.  4,  etc.). 

Vers.  48-54.  Moses  was  not  to  muster  the  tribe  of  Levi  along 
with  the  children  of  Israel,  i.e.  with  the  other  tribes,  or  take  their 
number,  but  to  appoint  the  Levites  for  the  service  of  the  dwelling 
of  the  testimony  (Ex.  xxxviii.  21),  i.e.  of  the  tabernacle,  that  they 
might  encamp  around  it,  might  take  it  down  when  the  camp  was 
broken  up,  and  set  it  up  when  Israel  encamped  again,  and  that  no 
stranger  {zar,  non-Levite,  as  in  Lev.  xxii.  10)  might  come  near  it 
and  be  put  to  death  (see  chap.  iii.).  The  rest  of  the  tribes  were  to 
encamp  every  man  in  his  place  of  encampment,  and  by  his  banner 
(see  at  chap..ii.  2),  in  their  hosts  (see  chap,  ii.),  that  wrath  might 
not  come  upon  the  congregation,  viz.  through  the  approach  of  a 
stranger.  ^>*P,  the  wrath  of  Jehovah,  breaking  in  judgment  upon 
the  unholy  who  approached  His  sanctuary  in  opposition  to  His 
command  (chap.  viii.  19,  xviii.  5,  22).  On  the  expression  ''  heep  the 
charge'^  {shamar  mishmereth),  see  at  Gen.  xxvi.  5  and  Lev.  viii.  35. 

Chap.  ii.  Order  of  the  Twelve  Tribes  in  the  Camp  and 
ON  the  March. — Vers.  1,  2.  The  twelve  tribes  were  to  encamp 
each  one  by  his  standard,  by  the  signs  of  their  fathers'  houses. 


I 


CIIAP.  II.  1,  2.  17 

opposite  to  the  tabernacle  (at  some  distance)  round  about,  and, 
according  to  the  more  precise  directions  given  afterwards,  in  such 
order  that  on  every  side  of  the  tabernacle  three  tribes  were  en- 
camped side  by  side  and  united  under  one  banner,  so  that  the  twelve 
tribes  formed  four  large  camps  or  divisions  of  an  army.  Between 
tliese  camps  and  the  court  surrounding  the  tabernacle,  the  three 
leading  mishpacJioih  of  the  Levites  were  to  be  encamped  on  three 
sides,  and  Closes  and  Aaron  with  the  sons  of  Aaron  {i,e.  the  priests) 
upon  the  fourth,  i.e.  the  front  or  eastern  side,  before  the  entrance 
(chap.  iii.  21-38).  ^^^.y  sl  standard,  banner,  or  flag,  denotes  primarily 
the  larger  field  sigji,  possessed  by  every  division  composed  of  three 
tribes,  which  was  also  the  banner  of  the  tribe  at  the  head  of  each 
division;  and  secondarily,  in  a  derivative  signification,  it  denotes 
the  army  united  under  one  standard,  like  o-rjfjLeui,  or  vexillum.  It 
is  used  thus,  for  example,  in  vers.  17,  31,  34,  and  in  combination 
with  HiTO  in  vers.  3,  10,  18,  and  25,  where  "  standard  of  the  camp 
of  Judah,  Reuben,  Ephraim,  and  Dan  "  signifies  the  hosts  of  the 
tribes  arranged  under  these  banners,  rihx,  the  signs  (ensigns),  were 
the  smaller  flags  or  banners  which  were  carried  at  the  head  of  the 
different  tribes  and  subdivisions  of  the  tribes  (the  fathers'  houses). 
Neither  the  Mosaic  law,  nor  the  Old  Testament  generally,  gives  us 
any  intimation  as  to  the  form  or  character  of  the  standard  (degel). 
According  to  rabbinical  tradition,  the  standard  of  Judah  bore  the 
figure  of  a  lion,  that  of  Reuben  the  likeness  of  a  man  or  of  a  man's 
head,  that  of  Ephraim  the  figure  of  an  ox,  and  that  of  Dan  the 
figure  of  an  eagle  ;  so  that  the  four  living  creatures  united  in  the 
cherubic  forms  described  by  Ezekiel  were  represented  upon  these 
four  standards.^ 

^  Jerome  Prado,  in  his  commentary  upon  Ezekiel  (chap.  i.  p.  44),  gives  the 
following  minute  description  according  to  rabbinical  tradition  :  "The  different 
leaders  of  the  tribes  had  their  own  standards,  with  the  crests  of  their  ancestors 
depicted  upon  them.  On  the  east,  above  the  tent  of  Naasson  the  first-born  of 
Judah^  there  shone  a  standard  of  a  green  colour,  this  colour  having  been  adopted 
by  him  because  it  was  in  a  green  stone,  viz.  an  emerald,  that  the  name  of  his 
forefather  Judah  was  engraved  on  the  breastplate  of  the  high  priest  (Ex.  xxv. 
15  sqq.),  and  on  this  standard  there  was  depicted  a  lion,  the  crest  and  hiero- 
glyphic of  his  ancestor  Judah,  whom  Jacob  had  compared  to  a  lion,  saying,. 
'  Judah  is  a  Uon's  whelp.'  Towards  the  south,  above  the  tent  of  Elisur  the  son 
of  Reuben^  there  floated  a  red  standard,  having  the  colour  of  the  sardus,  on 
which  the  name  of  his  father,  viz.  Reuben,  was  engraved  upon  the  breastplate  of 
the  high  priest.  The  symbol  depicted  upon  this  standard  was  a  human  head, 
because  Reuben  was  the  first-born,  and  head  of  the  family.  On  the  west,  above 
the  tent  of  Elisliamali  the  son  of  Epliraim^  there  vras  a  golden  flag,  on  which  the 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  B 


)0K  OF  MOSES. 

Yers.  3-31.  Order  of  the  tribes  in  the  camp  and  on  the  march. — 
Vers.  3-9.  The  standard  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  was  to  encamp  in 
front,  namely  towards  the  east,  according  to  its  hosts;  and  by  its 
side  the  tribes  of  Issachar  and  Zebulun,  the  descendants  of  Leah, 
under  the  command  and  banner  of  Judah:  an  army  of  186,400 
men,  which  was  to  march  out  first  when  the  camp  was  broken  up 
(ver.  0),  so  that  Judah  led  the  way  as  the  champion  of  his  bretliren 
(Gen.  xlix.  10). — Ver.  4.  '^  His  hasty  and  those  that  were  numbered 
of  them  "  (cf.  vers.  6,  8,  11,  etc.),  i.e.  the  army  according  to  its 
numbered  men. — Vers.  10-16.  On  the  south  side  was  the  standard 
of  Reuben,  with  which  Simeon  and  Gad,  descendants  of  Leah  and 
her  maid  Zilpah,  were  associated,  and  to  which  they  were  subordi- 
nated. In  ver.  14,  Reuel  is  a  mistake  for  Deuel  (chap.  i.  14,  vii. 
42,  X.  20),  which  is  the  reading  given  here  in  118  MSS.  cited  by 
Kennicott  and  De  Rossi,  in  several  of  the  ancient  editions,  and  in 
the  Samaritan,  Vulgate,  and  Jon.  Saad.,  whereas  the  LXX.,  OnJc, 
Si/r.,  and  Fers.  read  Reuel.  This  army  of  151,450  men  was  to 
break  up  and  march  as  tlie  second  division. — Ver.  17.  The  taber- 
nacle, the  camp  of  the  Levites,  was  to  break  up  after  this  in  the 
midst  of  the  camps  {i.e.  of  the  other  tribes).  ''As  they  encamp,  so 
shall  they  break  up"  that  is  to  say,  w^ith  Levi  in  the  midst  of  tlie 
tribes,  "  every  man  in  his  place,  according  to  his  banner."  T,  place, 
as  in  Deut.  xxiii.  13,  Isa.  Ivii.  8. — Vers.  18-24.  On  the  west  the 
standard  of  Ephraim,  wdth  the  tribes  of  Manasseh  and  Benjamin, 
that  is  to  say,  the  whole  of  the  descendants  of  Rachel,  108,100  men, 
as  the  third  division  of  the  army. — Vers.  25-31.  Lastly,  towards  the 
north  was  the  standard  of  Gad,  with  Asher  and  Naphtali,  the  de- 
scendants of  the  maids  Bilhah  and  Zilpah,  157,600  men,  who  were 

head  of  a  calf  was  depicted,  because  it  was  through  the  vision  of  the  cah'cs  or 
oxen  that  his  ancestor  Joseph  had  predicted  and  provided  for  the  famine  in 
Egypt  (Gen.  xli.) ;  and  hence  Moses,  when  blessing  the  tribe  of  Joseph,  i.e. 
Ephraim  (Deut.  xxxiii.  17),  said,  'his  glory  is  that  of  the  first-born  of  a  bull.* 
The  golden  splendour  of  the  standard  of  Ephraim  resembled  that  of  the  chryso- 
lite, in  which  the  name  of  Ephraim  was  engraved  upon  the  breastplate.  Towards 
the  north,  above  the  tent  of  Ahiezer  the  son  of  Dan,  there  floated  a  motley 
standard  of  white  and  red,  like  the  jaspis  (or,  as  some  say,  a  carbuncle),  in 
which  the  name  of  Dan  was  engraved  upon  the  breastplate.  The  crest  upon 
this  was  an  eagle,  the  great  foe  to  serpents,  which  had  been  chosen  by  the 
leader  in  the  place  of  a  serpent,  because  his  forefather  Jacob  had  compared  Dan 
to  a  serpent,  saying,  '  Dan  is  a  serpent  in  the  way,  an  adder  {cerastes,  a  horned 
snake)  in  the  path  ; '  but  Ahiezer  substituted  the  eagle,  the  destroyer  of  serpents, 
as  he  shrank  from  carrying  an  adder  upon  his  flag." 


CHAP.  III.  1-4.  19 

to  be  the  last  to  break  up,  and  formed  the  rear  on  the  march. — Ver. 
31.  Dn''i3ni'  (according  to  their  standards)  is  equivalent  to  D^i<2y^ 
{according  to  their  Jiosts)  in  vers.  9,  16,  and  24,  i.e.  according  to  the 
liosts  of  which  they  consisted. 

Vers.  32-34.  In  ver.  32  we  have  the  whole  number  given, 
603,550  men,  not  including  the  Levites  (ver.  33,  see  at  chap.  i.  49)  ; 
and  in  ver.  34  the  concluding  remark  as  to  the  subsequent  execution 
of  the  divine  command, — an  anticipatory  notice,  as  in  Ex.  xii.  50, 
xl.  16,  etc. 

Chap.  iii.  MusTER  OF  THE  Tribe  of  Levi. — As  Jacob  had 
adopted  the  two  sons  of  Joseph  as  his  own  sons,  and  thus  promoted 
them  to  the  rank  of  heads  of  tribes,  the  tribe  of  Levi  formed, 
strictly  speaking,  the  thirteenth  tribe  of  the  whole  nation,  and  was 
excepted  from  the  muster  of  the  twelve  tribes  who  were  destined 
to  form  the  army  of  Jehovah,  because  God  had  chosen  it  for  the 
service  of  the  sanctuary.  Out  of  this  tribe  God  had  not  only  called 
Moses  to  be  the  deliverer,  lawgiver,  and  leader  of  His  people, 
but  Moses'  brother  Aaron,  with  the  sons  of  the  latter,  to  be  the 
custodians  of  the  sanctuary.  And  now,  lastly,  the  whole  tribe  was 
chosen,  in  the  place  of  the  first-born  of  all  the  tribes,  to  assist  the 
priests  in  performing  the  duties  of  the  sanctuary,  and  was  numbered 
and  mustered  for  this  its  special  calling. 

Vers.  1-4.  Li  order  to  indicate  at  the  very  outset  the  position 
which  the  Levites  were  to  occupy  in  relation  to  the  priests  (viz. 
Aaron  and  his  descendants),  the  account  of  their  muster  commences 
not  only  with  the  enumeration  of  the  sons  of  Aaron  who  were- 
chosen  as  priests  (vers.  2-4),  but  with  the  heading :  "  These  are  the 
generations  of  Aaron  and  Moses  in  the  day  (i.e.  at  the  time)  when 
Jehovah  spake  icith  Moses  in  Mount  Sinai  (ver.  1).     The  toledoth 
(see  at  Gen.  ii.  4)  of  Moses  and  Aaron  are  not  only  the  families.. 
which  sprang  from  Aaron  and  Moses,  but  the  Levitical  families, 
generally,  which  were  named  after  Aaron  and  Moses,  because  they- 
were  both  of  them  raised  into  the  position  of  heads  or  spiritual 
fathers  of  the  whole  tribe,  namely,  at  the  time  when  God  spoke  to* 
Moses  upon  Sinai.     Understood  in  this  way,  the  notice  as  to  the 
time  is  neither  a  superfluous  repetition,  nor  introduced  with  ji'efer- 
cnce  to  the  subsequent  numbering  of  the  people  in  the  steppes  of 
Moab  (chap.  xxvi.  57  sqq.).     Aaron  is  placed  before  Moses  here 
(see  at  Ex.  vi.  26  sqq.),  not  merely  as  being  the  elder  of  the  two,, 
but  because  his  sons  received  the  priestliood,  whilst  the  sons  of 


20  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Moses,  on  the  contrary,  were  classed  among  the  rest  of  the  Levitical 
families  (cf.  1  Chron.  xxiii.  14). — Yers.  2  sqq.  Names  of  the  sons  of 
Aaron,  the  ^' anointed  priests  (see  Lev.  viii.  12),  ivhosehand  the}/ filled 
to  be  priests,^^  i.e.  who  were  appointed  to  the  priesthood  (see  at  Lev. 
vii.  37).  On  Nadab  and  Abihu,  see  Lev.  x.  1,  2.  As  they  had 
neither  of  them  any  children  when  they  were  put  to  death,  Eleazar 
and  Ithamar  were  the  only  priests  "  in  the  sight  of  Aaron  their  father,'' 
i.e.  during  his  lifetime.     "/?i  the  sight  of:''  as  in  Gen.  xi.  28. 

Vers.  5-10.  The  Levites  are  placed  before  Aaron  the  priest,  to 
be  his  servants. — Ver.  6.  ''Bring  near:"  as  in  Ex.  xxviii.  1.  The 
expression  ''JS^  ^^V  is  frequently  met  with  in  connection  with  the 
position  of  a  servant,  as  standing  before  his  master  to  receive  his 
commands. — Ver.  7.  They  were  to  keep  the  charge  of  Aaron  and 
the  whole  congregation  before  the  tabernacle,  to  attend  to  the  ser- 
vice of  the  dwelling,  i.e.  to  observe  what  Aaron  (the  priest)  and 
the  whole  congregation  were  bound  to  perform  in  relation  to  the 
service  at  the  dwelling-place  of  Jehovah.  "  To  keep  the  charge :" 
see  chap.  i.  53  and  Gen.  xxvi.  5.  In  ver.  8  this  is  more  fully 
explained :  they  were  to  keep  the  vessels  of  the  tabernacle,  and  to 
attend  to  all  that  was  binding  upon  the  children  of  Israel  in  relation 
to  them,  i.e.  to  take  the  oversight  of  the  furniture,  to  keep  it  safe 
and  clean. — Ver.  9.  Moses  was  also  to  give  the  Levites  to  Aaron 
^nd  his  sons.  "  They  are  wholly  given  to  him  out  of  the  children  of 
Israel:"  the  repetition  of  D^IH^  here  and  in  chap.  viii.  16  is  emphatic, 
and  expressive  of  complete  surrender  (JEwald,  §  313).  The  Levites, 
however,  as  nethunim,  must  be  distinguished  from  the  nethinim  of 
non-Israelitish  descent,  who  were  given  to  the  Levites  at  a  later 
period  as  temple  slaves,  to  perform  the  lowest  duties  connected  with 
the  sanctuary  (see  at  Josh.  ix.  27). — Ver.  10.  Aaron  and  his  sons 
were  to  be  appointed  by  Moses  to  take  charge  of  the  priesthood ;  as 
no  stranger,  no  one  who  was  not  a  son  of  Aaron,  could  approach 
the  sanctuary  without  being  put  to  death  (cf.  chap.  i.  53  and  Lev. 
xxii.  10). 

Vers.  11-13.  God  appointed  the  Levites  for  this  service,  because 
He  had  decided  to  adopt  them  as  His  own  in  the  place  of  all  the 
lirst-born  of  Egypt.  When  He  slew  the  first-born  of  Eg}^pt,  He 
sanctified  to  Himself  all  the  first-born  of  Israel,  of  man  and  beast, 
for  Ilis  own  possession  (see  Ex.  xiii.  1,  2).  By  virtue  of  this 
sanctification,  which  was  founded  upon  the  adoption  of  the  whole 
nation  as  His  first-born  son  (see  vol.  ii.  p.  33),  the  nation  was  re- 
quired to  dedicate  to  Him  its  first-born  sons  for  service  at  the  sane- 


CHAP.  III.  14-26.  21 

tuary,  and  sacrifice  all  the  first-born  of  its  cattle  to  Him.  But  now 
the  Levites  and  their  cattle  were  to  be  adopted  in  their  place,  and 
the  first-born  sons  of  Israel  to  be  released  in  return  (vers.  40  sqq.). 
By  this  arrangement,  through  which  the  care  of  the  service  at  the 
sanctuary  was  transferred  to  one  tribe,  which  would  and  should 
henceforth  devote  itself  with  undivided  interest  to  this  vocation,  not 
only  was  a  more  orderly  performance  of  this  service  secured,  than 
could  have  been  effected  through  the  first-born  of  all  the  tribes ; 
but  so  far  as  the  whole  nation  was  concerned,  the  fulfilment  of  its 
obligations  in  relation  to  this  service  was  undoubtedly  facilitated. 
Moreover,  the  Levites  had  proved  themselves  to  be  the  rtiost  suit- 
able of  all  the  tribes  for  this  post,  through  their  firm  and  faithful 
defence  of  the  honour  of  the  Lord  at  the  worship  of  the  golden 
calf  (Ex.  xxxii.  26  sqq.).  It  is  in  this  spirit,  which  distinguished 
the  tribe  of  Levi,  that  we  may  undoubtedly  discover  the  reason 
why  they  were  chosen  by  God  for  the  service  of  the  sanctuary,  and 
not  in  the  fact  that  Moses  and  Aaron  belonged  to  the  tribe,  and 
desired  to  form  a  hierarchical  caste  of  the  members  of  their  own 
tribe,  such  as  was  to  be  found  among  other  nations :  the  magi, 
for  example,  among  the  Medes,  the  Chaldeans  among  the  Persians, 
and  the  Brahmins  among  the  Indians,  nin)  '>:«  '•7^  "  to  Me,  to  Me, 
Jeliovah''  (vers.  13,  41,  and  45 ;  cf.  Ges.  §  i21,'3J. 

Vers.  14-20.  The  muster  of  the  Levites  included  all  the  males 
from  a  month  old  and  upwards,  because  they  were  to  be  sanctified 
to  Jehovah  in  the  place  of  the  first-born  ;  and  it  was  at  the  age  of  a 
month  that  the  latter  were  either  to  be  given  up  or  redeemed  (comp. 
vers.  40  and  43  with  chap,  xviii.  16).  In  vers.  17-20  the  sons  of 
Levi  and  their  sons  are  enumerated,  who  were  the  founders  of  the 
mishpachoth  among  the  Levites,  as  in  Ex.  vi.  16-19. 

Vers.  21-26.  The  Gershonites  were  divided  into  two  families, 
containing  7500  males.  They  were  to  encamp  under  their  chief 
Eliasaph,  behind  the  tabernacle,  i.e.  on  the  western  side  (vers.  23, 
24),  and  \Vere  to  take  charge  of  the  dwelling-place  and  the  tent, 
the  covering,  the  curtain  at  the  entrance,  the  hangings  round  the 
court  with  the  curtains  at  the  door,  and  the  cords  of  the  tent,  "  in 
relation  to  all  the  service  thereof  ^^  (vers.  25  sqq.)  ;  that  is  to  say, 
according  to  the  more  precise  injunctions  in  chap.  iv.  25-27,  they 
were  to  carry  the  tapestry  of  the  dwelling  (the  inner  covering,  Ex. 
xxvi.  1  sqq.),  and  of  the  tent  (i.e.  the  covering  made  of  goats'  hair, 
Ex.  xxvi.  7  sqq.),  the  covering  thereof  (i.e.  the  covering  of  rams' 
skins  dyed  red,  and  the  covering  of  sea-cow  skin  upon  the  top  of 


22  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES.  *       ^^^^M 

it,  Ex.  xxvii.  16),  the  hangings  of  the  court  and  the  curtain  at  the 
entrance  (Ex.  xxvii.  9,  16),  which  surrounded  the  altar  (of  burnt- 
offering)  and  the  dwelling  round  about,  and  their  cords,  i.e.  the 
cords  of  the  tapestry,  coverings,  and  curtains  (Ex.  xxvii.  14),  and 
all  the  instruments  of  their  service,  i.e.  the  things  used  in  connec- 
tion with  their  service  (Ex.  xxvii.  19),  and  were  to  attend  to  every- 
thing that  had  to  be  done  to  them ;  in  other  w^ords,  to  perform 
whatever  was  usually  done  with  those  portions  of  the  sanctuary  that 
are  mentioned  here,  especially  in  setting  up  the  tabernacle  or  taking 
it  down.  The  suffix  in  VWO  (ver.  26)  does  not  refer  to  the  court 
mentioned  immediately  before  ;  for,  according  to  ver.  37,  the  Me- 
rarites  were  to  carry  the  cords  of  the  hangings  of  the  court,  but  to 
the  "  dwelling  and  tent,"  which  stand  farther  off.  In  the  same  way 
the  words,  "  for  all  the  service  thereof ^^  refer  to  all  those  portions  of 
the  sanctuary  that  are  mentioned,  and  mean  "  everything  that  had 
to  be  done  or  attended  to  in  connection  with  these  things." 

Vers.  27-32.  The  Kohathites,  who  were  divided  into  four  fami- 
lies, and  numbered  8600,  were  to  encamp  on  the  south  side  of  the 
tabernacle,  and  more  especially  to  keep  the  charge  of  the  sanctuary 
(ver.  28),  viz.  to  take  care  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  the  table 
(of  shew-bread),  the  candlestick,  the  altars  (of  incense  and  burnt- 
offering),  with  the  holy  things  required  for  the  service  performed 
in  connection  therewith,  and  the  curtain  (the  veil  before  the  most 
holy  place),  and  to  perform  whatever  had  to  be  done  ("  all  the 
service  thereof,"  see  at  ver.  26),  i.e.  to  carry  the  said  holy  things 
after  they  had  been  rolled  up  in  covers  by  the  priests  (see  chap.  iv. 
5  sqq.). — Ver.  32.  As  the  priests  also  formed  part  of  the  Kohathites, 
their  chief  is  mentioned  as  well,  viz.  Eleazar  the  eldest  son  of  Aaron 
the  high  priest,  who  was  placed  over  the  chiefs  of  the  three  Levitical 
families,  and  called  JT^pS,  oversight  of  the  keepers  of  the  charge  of  the 
sanctuary ^^  i.e.  authority,  superior,  of  the  servants  of  the  sanctuary. 

Vers.  33—37.  The  Merarites,  who  formed  two  families,  com- 
prising 6200  males,  were  to  encamp  on  the  north  side  of  the  taber- 
nacle, under  their  prince  Zitriel,  and  to  observe  the  boards,  bolts, 
pillars,  and  sockets  of  the  dwelling-place  (Ex.  xxvi.  15,  26,  32,  37), 
together  with  all  the  vessels  thereof  (the  plugs  and  tools),  and  all 
that  had  to  be  done  in  connection  therewith,  also  the  pillars  of  the 
court  with  their  sockets,  the  plugs  and  the  cords  (Ex.  xxvii.  10,  19, 
xxxv.  18)  ;  that  i^to  say,  they  were  to  take  charge  of  these  when 
the  tabernacle  was  taken  down,  to  carry  them  on  the  march,  and  to 
fix  them  when  the  tabernacle  was  set  up  again  (chap.  iv.  31,  32). 


CHAP.  III.  S8-51.  23 

Vers.  38,  39.  Moses  and  Aaron,  with  the  sons  of  the  latter 
(the  priests),  were  to  encamp  in  front,  before  the  tabernacle,  viz. 
on  the  eastern  side,  "  as  keepers  of  the  charge  of  the  sanctuary  for 
the  charge  of  the  children  of  Israel^^  i.e.  to  attend  to  everything  that 
was  binding  upon  the  children  of  Israel  in  relation  to  the  care  of 
the  sanctuary,  as  no  stranger  was  allowed  to  approach  it  on  pain 
of  death  (see  chap.  i.  51). — Ver.  39.  The  number  of  the  Levites 
mustered,  22,000,  does  not  agree  with  the  numbers  assigned  to 
the  three  families,  as  7500  +  8600  +  6200  =^  22,300.  But  the  total 
is  correct ;  for,  according  to  ver.  46,  the  number  of  the  first-born, 
22,273,  exceeded  the  total  number  of  the  Levites  by  273.  The 
attempt  made  by  the  Rabbins  and  others  to  reconcile  the  two,  by 
supposing  the  300  Levites  in  excess  to  be  themselves  first-born,  who 
were  omitted  in  the  general  muster,  because  they  were  not  qualified 
to  represent  the  first-born  of  the  other  tribes,  is  evidently  forced 
and  unsatisfactory.  The  whole  account  is  so  circumstantial,  that 
such  a  fact  as  this  would  never  have  been  omitted.  We  must 
rather  assume  that  there  is  a  copyist's  error  in  the  number  of  one  of 
the  Levitical  families ;  possibly  in  ver.  28  we  should  read  ^^  for 
vi'X)  (8300  for  8600).  The  puncta  extraordinaria  above  pnt<l  are 
intended  to  indicate  that  this  word  is  either  suspicious  or  spurious 
(see  at  Gen.  xxxiii.  5)  ;  and  it  is  actually  omitted  in  &am.^  /Syr.,  and 
12  MSS.,  but  without  sufficient  reason  :  for  altliough  the  divine 
command  to  muster  the  Levites  (vers.  5  and  14)  was  addressed  to 
Moses  alone,  yet  if  we  compare  chap.  iv.  1,  34,  37,  41,  45,  where 
the  Levites  qualified  for  service  are  said  to  have  been  mustered  by 
Moses  and  Aaron,  and  still  more  chap.  iv.  46,  where  the  elders  of 
Israel  are  said  to  have  taken  part  in  the  numbering  of  the  Levites 
as  well  as  in  that  of  the  twelve  tribes  (chap.  i.  3,  4),  there  can  be  no 
reason  to  doubt  that  Aaron  also  took  part  in  the  mustering  of  the 
whole  of  the  Levites,  for  the  purpose  of  adoption  in  the  place  of 
the  first-born  of  Israel;  and  no  suspicion  attaches  to  this  introduc- 
tion of  his  name  in  ver.  39,  although  it  is  not  mentioned  in  vers. 
5,  11,  14,  40,  and  44. 

Vers.  40-51.  After  this,  Moses  numbered  the  first-born  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  to  exchange  them  for  the  Levites  according  to 
the  command  of  God,  which  is  repeated  in  vers.  41  and  44-45  from 
vers.  11-13,  and  to  adopt  the  latter  in  their  stead  for  the  service  at 
the  sanctuary  (on  vers.  41  and  45,  cf.  vers.  11-13).  The  number 
of  the  first-born  of  the  twelve  tribes  amounted  to  22,273  of  a  month 
old  and  upwards  (ver.  43).    Of  this  number  22,000  were  exchanged 


FOURTH  BOOK  OF 

for  the  22,000  Levites,  and  the  cattle  of  the  Levites  were  also  set 
against  the  first-born  of  the  cattle  of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  though 
without  their  being  numbered  and  exchanged  head  for  head.  In 
vers.  44  and  45  the  command  of  God  concerning  the  adoption  of 
the  Levites  is  repeated,  for  the  purpose  of  adding  the  further  in- 
structions with  regard  to  tlie  273,  the  number  by  which  the  first- 
born of  the  tribes  exceeded  those  of  the  Levites.  "  And  as  for  the 
redemption  of  the  273  (lit.  the  273  to  be  redeemed)  of  the  first-horn 
of  the  children  of  Israel  which  are  more  than  the  Levites^  thou  shalt 
take  five  shekels  a  heady  ^  etc.  This  was  the  general  price  established 
by  the  law  for  the  redemption  of  the  first-born  of  men  (see  chap, 
xviii.  16).  On  the  sacred  shekel,  see  at  Ex.  xxx.  13.  The  redemp- 
tion money  for  273  lirst-bom,  in  all  1365  shekels,  was  to  be  paid  to 
Aaron  and  his  sons  as  compensation  for  the  persons  who  properly 
belonged  to  Jehovah,  and  had  been  appointed  as  first-born  for  the 
service  of  the  priests. — Yer.  49.  "  The  redeemed  of  the  Levites  ^^  are 
the  22,000  who  were  redeemed  by  means  of  the  Levites.  In  ver. 
50,  the  Chethibh  Q^IS^  is  the  correct  reading,  and  the  Keri  Q^'J?'?  ^^ 
unnecessary  emendation.  The  number  of  the  first-born  and  that 
of  the  Levites  has  already  been  noticed  at  pp.  8,  9. 

Chap.  iv.  KuLES  OF  Service,  and  numbering  of  the  Levites 
QUALIFIED  FOR  SERVICE. — After  the  adoption  of  the  Levites  for 
service  at  the  sanctuary,  in  the  place  of  the  first-born  of  Israel, 
Moses  and  Aaron  mustered  the  tliree  families  of  the  Levites  by 
the  command  of  God  for  the  service  to  be  performed  by  those 
who  were  between  the  ages  of  30  and  50.  The  particulars  of  the 
service  are  first  of  all  described  in  detail  (vers.  4-33);  and  then  the 
men  in  each  family  are  taken,  of  the  specified  age  for  service  (vers. 
34-49).  The  three  families  are  not  arranged  according  to  the 
relative  ages  of  their  founders,  but  according  to  the  importance 
or  sacredness  of  their  service.  The  Kohathites  take  the  lead,  be- 
cause the  holiest  parts  of  the  tabernacle  were  to  be  carried  and  kept 
by  this  family,  which  included  the  priests,  Aaron  and  his  sons. 
The  service  to  be  performed  by  each  of  the  three  Levitical  families 
is  introduced  in  every  case  by  a  command  from  God  to  take  the 
sum  of  the  men  from  30  years  old  to  50  (see  vers.  1-3,  21-23,  29 
and  30). 

Vers.  2-20.  Service  of  the  Kohathites,  and  the  number  qualified 
for  service. — Vers.  2,  3.  "  Take  the  sum  of  the  sons  of  Kohath  from 
among  the  sons  of  Levi  :'^  i.e.  by  raising  them  out  of  the  sum  total 


I 


CHAP.  IV.  2-20.  25 

of  the  Levites,  by  numbering  them  first  and  specially,  viz.  the 
men  from  30  to  50  years  of  age,  "  evetn/  one  who  comes  to  the  servicej^ 
i.e.  who  has  to  enter  upon  service  "  to  do  work  at  the  tahernacler 
^y^  {Angl.  'host^)  signifies  military  service,  and  is  used  here  with 
special  reference  to  the  service  of  the  Levites  as  the  militia  sacra  of 
Jehovah. — Ver.  4.  The  service  of  the  Kohathites  at  the  tabernacle 
is  (relates  to)  "  the  most  holy  "  (see  at  Ex.  xxx.  10).  This  term 
includes,  as  is  afterwards  explained,  the  most  holy  things  in  the 
tabernacle,  viz.  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  the  table  of  shew-bread, 
the  candlestick,  the  altar  of  incense  and  altar  of  burnt-offering, 
together  with  all  the  other  things  belonging  to  these.  When  the 
camp  w^as  broken  up,  the  priests  were  to  roll  them  up  in  wrappers, 
and  hand  them  over  in  this  state  to  the  Kohathites,  for  them  to 
carry  (vers.  5-15).  First  of  all  (vers.  5,  6),  Aaron  and  his  sons 
were  to  take  down  the  curtain  between  the  holy  place  and  the  most 
holy  (see  Ex.  xxvi.  31),  and  to  cover  the  ark  of  testimony  with  it 
(Ex.  XXV.  10).  Over  this  they  were  to  place  a  wrapper  of  sea-cow 
skin  (tachash,  see  Ex.  xxv.  5),  and  over  this  again  another  covering 
of  cloth  made  entirely  of  hyacinth-coloured  purple  (as  in  Ex.  xxviii. 
31).  The  sea-cow  skin  was  to  protect  the  inner  curtain,  which  was 
covered  over  the  ark,  from  storm  and  rain ;  the  hyacinth  purple,  to 
distinguish  the  ark  of  the  covenant  as  the  throne  of  the  glory  of 
Jehovah.  Lastly,  they  were  to  place  the  staves  into  the  rings  again, 
that  is  to  say,  the  bearing  poles,  which  were  always  left  in  their 
places  on  the  ark  (Ex.  xxv.  15),  but  had  necessarily  to  be  taken 
out  while  it  was  being  covered  and  wrapped  up. — Vers.  7,  8.  Over 
the  table  of  shew-bread  (Ex.  xxv.  23)  they  were  to  spread  a  hyacinth 
cloth,  to  place  the  plates,  bowls,  w^ine-pitchers,  and  drink-offering 
bowls  (Ex.  xxv.  29)  upon  the  top  of  this,  and  to  lay  shew-bread 
thereon  ;  and  then  to  spread  a  crimson  cloth  over  these  vessels  and 
the  shew-bread,  and  cover  this  with  a  sea-cow  skin,  and  lastly  to  put 
the  bearing  poles  in  their  places. — Vers.  9,  10.  The  candlestick, 
with  its  lamps,  snuffers,  extinguishers  (Ex.  xxv.  31-37),  and  all  its 
oil-vessels  (oil-cans),  ^*  tvherewith  they  serve  ity"  i.e.  prepare  it  for  the 
holy  service,  were  to  be  covered  with  a  hyacinth  cloth,  and  then  with 
a  wrapper  of  sea-cow  skin,  and  laid  upon  the  carriage,  ^io  (vers. 
10  and  12),  bearing  frame,  in  chap.  xiii.  23  bearing  poles. — Vers. 
11,  12.  So  again  they  were  to  wrap  up  the  altar  of  incense  (Ex. 
xxx.  1),  to  adjust  its  bearing  poles ;  and  having  wrapped  it  up  in 
such  coverings,  along  with  the  vessels  belonging  to  it,  to  lay  it  upon 
the  frame. — Vers.  13,  14.  The  altar  of  burnt-offering  was  first  of 


26  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

all  to  be  cleansed  from  the  aslies  ;  a  crimson  cloth  was  then  to  be 
covered  over  it,  and  the  whole  of  the  furniture  belonrjincr  to  it  to  be 
placed  upon  the  top  ;  and  lastly,  the  whole  was  to  be  covered  with  a 
sea-cow  skin.  The  only  thing  not  mentioned  is  the  copper  laver 
(Ex.  XXX.  18),  probably  because  it  was  carried  without  lany  cover 
at  alL  The  statement  in  the  Septuagint  and  the  Samaritan  text, 
which  follows  ver.  14,  respecting  its  covering  and  conveyance  upon 
a  frame,  is  no  doubt  a  spurious  interpolation. — Ver.  15.  After  the 
priests  had  completed  the  wrapping  up  of  all  these  things,  the 
Kohathites  were  to  come  up  to  carry  them ;  but  they  were  not  to 
touch  "  the  holy  "  (the  holy  things),  lest  they  should  die  (see  chap.  i. 
53,  xviii.  3,  and  comp.  2  Sam.  vi.  6,  7). — Ver.  16.  The  oversight 
of  the  oil  for  the  candlestick  (Ex.  xxvii.  20),  the  incense  (Ex. 
XXX.  34),  the  continual  meat-offering  (Ex.  xxix.  40),  and  the  anoint- 
ing oil  (Ex.  XXX.  23),  belonged  to  Eleazar  as  the  head  of  all  the 
Levites  (chap.  iii.  32).  He  liad  also  the  oversight  of  the  dwelling' 
and  all  the  holy  things  and  furniture  belonging  to  it;  and,  as  a 
comparison  of  vers.  28  and  33  clearly  shows,  of  the  services  of  the 
Kohathites  also. — ^Vers.  17-20.  In  order  to  prevent  as  far  as  possible 
any  calamity  from  befalling  the  Levites  while  carrying  the  most 
holy  things,  the  priests  are  again  urged  by  the  command  of  God  to 
do  what  has  already  been  described  in  detail  in  vers.  5-15,  lest  through 
any  carelessness  on  their  part  they  should  cut  off  the  tribe  of  the 
families  of  the  Kohathites,  i.e.  should  cause  their  destruction ;  viz.  if 
they  should  approach  the  holy  things  before  they  had  been  wrapped 
up  by  Aaron  and  his  sons  in  the  manner  prescribed  and  handed 
over  to  them  to  carry.  If  the  Kohathites  should  come  for  only  a 
single  moment  to  look  at  the  holy  things,  they  would  die.  ^^"'I^n"?^^, 
"  cut  ye  not  o^,"  i.e.  "  take  care  that  the  Kohathites  are  not  cut  off 
through  your  mistake  and  negligence"  (Bos.).  "  The  tribe  of  the  I 
families  of  the  Kohathites : "  shehet,  the  tribe,  is  not  used  here,  as  it 
frequently  is,  in  its  derivative  sense  of  tribe  (tribiis),  but  in  the  ori- 
ginal literal  sense  of  stirps. — Ver.  19.  "  Tliis  do  to  them:^'  sc.  what 
is  prescribed  in  vers.  5-15  with  reference  to  their  service. — Ver.  20. 
V?^^,  "  like  a  swallow^  a  gulj),'^  is  probably  a  proverbial  expression, 
according  to  the  analogy  of  Job  vii.  19,  for  "a  single  instant^^  of 
which  the  Arabic  also  furnishes  examples  (see  A,  Schultens  on  Job 
vii.  19).  The  Sept.  rendering,  i^aTriva,  conveys  the  actual  sense.  ^ 
A  historical  illustration  of  ver.  20  is  furnished  by  1  Sam.  vi.  19.^     fl 

^  According  to  Knolel,  vers.  17-20  have  been  interpolated  by  the  Jehovist 
into  the  Elohistic  text.     But  the  reasons  for  this  assumption  are  weak  through- 


I 


CHAP.  IV.  21-49.  27 

Vers.  21-28.  The  service  of  the  GersJionites  is  introduced  in  vers. 
21-23  in  the  same  manner  as  that  of  the  Kohathites  in  vers.  1-3  ; 
and  in  vers.  24-26  it  is  described  in  accordance  with  the  brief 
notice  and  explanation  already  given  in  chap.  iii.  24-26. — Ver.  27. 
Their  service  was  to  be  performed  '^according  to  the  mouth  (i.e. 
according  to  the  appointment)  of  Aaron  and  his  sons,  with  regard 
to  all  their  carrying  (all  that  they  were  to  carry),  and  all  their 
doing." — ''And  ye  (the  priests)  shall  appoint  to  them  for  attendance 
(in  charge)  all  their  carrying^'  i.e.  all  the  things  they  were  to 
carry.  rinpD^n  "1^3^  to  give  into  keeping.  The  combination  of 
"ii?3  with  ^  and  the  accusative  of  the  object  is  analogous  to  3  |nj,  to 
give  into  a  person's  hand,  in  Gen.  xxvii.  17;  and  there  is  no  satisfac- 
tory reason  for  any  such  emendations  of  the  text  as  Knohel  proposes. 
— Ver.  28.  "  Their  charge  (rnishmereth)  is  in  the  hand  of  Ithamar," 
i.e.  is  to  be  carried  out  under  his  superintendence  (cf.  Ex.  xxxviii. 
21). 

Vers.  29-33.  Service  of  the  Merarites.— Vers.  29  and  30,  like 
vers.  22  and  23.  1i?S,  to  muster,  i.e.  to  number,  equivalent  to 
l^'iii  NbO,  to  take  the  number. — Vers.  31  and  32,  like  chap.  iii.  36 
and  37.  "  The  charge  of  their  burden"  (their  caiTying),  i.e.  the 
things  which  it  was  their  duty  to  carry. — Ver.  32.  Dn''73"^^7 :  with 
regard  to  all  their  instruments,  i.e.  all  the  things  used  for  setting 
up,  fastening,  or  undoing  the  beams,  bolts,  etc. ;  see  chap.  iii.  36, 
and  Ex.  xxvii.  19. 

Vers.  34-49.  Completion  of  the  prescribed  mustering,  and 
statement  of  the  number  of  men  qualified  for  service  in  the  three 
Levitical  families  :  viz.  2750  Kohathites,  2630  Gershonites,  and 
3200  Merarites — in  all,  8580  Levites  fit  for  service  :  a  number 
which  bears  a  just  proportion  to  the  total  number  of  male  Levites 
of  a  month  old  and  upwards,  viz.  22,000  (see  above,  p.  9). — Ver. 
49.  "  A  ccording  to  the  commandment  of  Jehovah,  they  appointed 
them  through  the  hand  of  Moses  {i.e.  under  his  direction),  each  one 

out.  Neither  the  peculiar  use  of  the  word  shebet,  to  which  there  is  no  corre- 
sponding parallel  in  the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament,  nor  the  construction  of  ^i^ 
with  nx,  which  is  only  met  with  in  1  Sam.  ix.  18  and  xxx.  21,  nor  the  Iliphil 
n^IDH,  can  be  regarded  as  criteria  of  a  Jehovistic  usage.  And  the  assertion, 
that  the  Elohist  lays  the  emphasis  upon  approaching  and  touching  the  holy 
things  (ver.  15,  chap.  viii.  19,  xviii.  3,  22),  and  not  upon  seeing  or  looking  at 
them,  rests  upon  an  antithesis  which  is  arbitrarily  forced  upon  the  text,  since 
not  only  seeing  (ver.  20),  but  touching  also  (ver.  19),  is  described  as  causing 
death ;  so  that  seeing  and  touching  form  no  antithesis  at  all. 


THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


to  his  service^  and  his  burden,  and  his  mustered  things  (V^ip3),  i,e,  the 
things  assigned  to  him  at  the  time  of  the  mustering  as  his  special 
charge  (see  Ex.  xxxviii.  21). 


SPIRITUAL  ORGANIZATION  OF  THE  CONGREGATION  OF  ISRAEL. — 
CHAP.  V.  AND  VI. 

From  the  outward  organization  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  as  tlie 
army  of  Jehovah,  the  law  proceeds  to  their  internal  moral  and  spi- 
ritual order,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  an  inward  support,  both 
moral  and  religious,  to  their  outward  or  social  and  political  unity. 
This  is  the  object  of  the  directions  concerning  the  removal  of 
unclean  persons  from  the  camp  (chap.  v.  1-4),  the  restitution 
of  anything  unjustly  appropriated  (vers.  5-10),  the  course  to  be 
pursued  with  a  wife  suspected  of  adultery  (vers.  11-31),  and  also 
of  the  laws  relating  to  the  Nazarite  (chap.  vi.  1-21),  and  to  the 
priestly  blessing  (vers.  22-27). 

Chap.  V.  1-4.  Eemoval  of  Unclean  Persons  out  of  the 
Camp. — As  Jehovah,  the  Holy  One,  dwelt  in  the  midst  of  the 
camp  of  His  people,  those  who  were  affected  with  the  uncleanness 
of  leprosy  (Lev.  xiii.),  of  a  diseased  flux,  or  of  menstruation  (Lev. 
XV.  2  sqq.,  19  sqq.),  and  those  who  had  become  unclean  through 
touching  a  corpse  (chap.  xix.  11  sqq.,  cf.  Lev.  xxi.  1,  xxii.  4), 
whether  male  or  female,  were  to  be  removed  out  of  the  camp,  that 
they  might  not  defile  it  by  their  uncleanness.  The  command  of 
God,  to  remove  these  persons  out  of  the  camp,  was  carried  out  at 
once  by  the  nation ;  and  even  in  Canaan  it  was  so  far  observed, 
that  lepers  at  any  rate  were  placed  in  special  pest-houses  outside 
the  cities  (see  at  Lev.  xiii.  45,  46). 

Vers.  5-10.  Restitution  in  case  of  a  Trespass.— No  crime 
against  the  property  of  a  neighbour  was  to  remain  without  expia- 
tion in  the  congregation  of  Israel,  which  was  encamped  or  dwelt 
around  the  sanctuary  of  Jehovah ;  and  the  wrong  committed  was 
not  to  remain  without  restitution,  because  such  crimes  involved 
unfaithfulness  QV'Oj  see  Lev.  v.  15)  towards  Jehovah.  '' If  a  man 
or  a  ivoman  do  one  of  the  sins  of  men,  to  commit  unfaithfulness 
against  JeJiovah,  and  the  same  soul  has  incurred  guilty  they  shall 
confess  their  sin  which  they  have  done,  and  (the  doer)  shall  recom- 


I 


J 


CHAP.  V.  11-31.  29 

fense  his  debt  according  to  its  sum"  (itJ'Nia,  as  in  Lev.  v.  24),  etc. 
DHSn  n^^t3^"?^D,  one  of  the  sins  occurring  among  men,  not  "a  sin 
against  a  man"  (Luther,  Eos.,  etc).  The  meaning  is  a  sin,  with  which 
a  Pyp  was  committed  against  Jehovah,  i.e.  one  of  the  acts  described 
in  Lev.  v.  21,  22,  by  which  injury  was  done  to  the  property  of 
a  neighbour,  whereby  a  man  brought  a  debt  upon  himself,  for  the 
wiping  out  of  which  a  material  restitution  of  the  other's  property 
was  prescribed,  together  with  the  addition  of  a  fifth  of  its  value, 
and  also  the  presentation  of  a  sin-offering  (Lev.  v.  23—26).  To 
guard  against  that  disturbance  of  fellowship  and  peace  in  the  con- 
gregation, which  would  arise  from  such  trespasses  as  these,  the  law 
already  given  in  Lev.  v.  20  is  here  renewed  and  supplemented  by 
the  additional  stipulation,  that  if  the  man  who  had  been  unjustly 
deprived  of  some  of  his  property  had  no  Goel,  to  whom  restitution 
could  be  made  for  the  debt,  the  compensation  should  be  paid  to 
Jehovah  for  the  priests.  The  Goel  was  the  nearest  relative,  upon 
whom  the  obligation  rested  to  redeem  a  person  who  had  fallen  into 
slavery  through  poverty  (Lev.  xxv.  25).  The  allusion  to  the  Goel 
in  this  connection  presupposes  that  the  injured  person  was  no 
longer  alive.  To  this  there  are  appended,  in  vers.  9  and  10,  the 
directions  which  are  substantially  connected  with  this,  viz.  that 
every  heave-offering  (terumah,  see  at  Lev.  ii.  9)  in  the  holy  gifts  of 
the  children  of  Israel,  which  they  presented  to  the  priest,  was  to 
belong  to  him  (the  priest),  and  also  all  the  holy  gifts  which  were 
brought  by  different  individuals.  The  reference  is  not  to  literal 
sacrifices,  i.e.  gifts  intended  for  the  altar,  but  to  dedicatory  offer- 
ings, first-fruits,  and  such  like.  VtjnpTiK  lih^^  "  with  regard  to  every 
marCs,  his  holy  gifts  .  .  .  to  him  (the  priest)  shall  they  be;  what 
any  man  gives  to  the  priest  shall  belong  to  him."  The  second  clause 
serves  to  explain  and  confirm  the  first.  HK :  as  far,  with  regard  to, 
quoad  (see  Ewald,  §  277,  d',  Ges.  §  117,  2,  note). 

Vers.  11-31.  Sentence  of  God  upon  Wives  suspected 
OF  Adultery. — As  any  suspicion  cherished  by  a  man  against  his 
wife,  that  she  either  is  or  has  been  guilty  of  adultery,  whether  well- 
founded  or  not,  is  sufficient  to  shake  the  mamage  connection  to  its 
very  roots,  and  to  undermine,  along  with  marriage,  the  foundation 
of  the  civil  commonwealth,  it  was  of  the  greatest  importance  to 
guard  against  this  moral  evil,  which  was  so  utterly  irreconcilable 
with  the  holiness  of  the  people  of  God,  by  appointing  a  process 
in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  the  theocratical  law,  and  adapted 


I 


Fourth  book  of  moses. 

to  bring  to  light  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  any  wife  who  had  fallen 

into  such   suspicion,   and  at  the  same  time  to  warn  fickle  wives  MM 

against  unfaithfulness.     This  serves  to  explain  not  only  the  intro-  ■■ 

duction  of   the  law  respecting  the  jealousy-ojfering  in  this  place, 

but  also  the  general  importance  of  the  subject,  and  the  reason  for 

its  being  so  elaborately  described. 

Vers.  12-15.  If  a  man's  wife  went  aside,   and  was  guiUy  of 

unfaithfulness   towards   him    (ver.   13    is  an  explanatory  clause), 

through  a  (another)  man  having  lain  with  her  with  emissio  seminis, 

and  it  was  hidden  from  the  eyes  of  her  husband,  on  account  of  her 

having  defiled  herself  secretly,  and  tliere  being  no  witness  against*  J I 

her,  and  her  not  having  been  taken  (in  the  act)  ;  but  if,  for  all  that,  ™' 

a  spirit  of  jealousy  came  upon  him,  and  he  was  jealous  of  his  wife, 

and  she  was  defiled,  ...  or  she  was  not  defiled:  the  man  was  to  m\ 

take  his  wife  to  the  priest,  and  bring  as  her  sacrificial  gift,  on  her 

account,  the  tenth  of  an  ephah  of  barley  meal,  without  putting  oil 

or  incense,  "/or  it  is  a  meat-offering  of  jealousy,  a  meat-offering  o/»| 

memory^  to  bring  iniquity  to  remembrance^^     As  the  woman's  crime, 

of  which  her  husband  accused  her,  was  naturally  denied  by  herself, 

and  was  neither  to  be  supported  by  witnesses  nor  proved  by  her 

being  taken  in  the  very  act,  the  only  way  left  to  determine  whether 

there  was  any  foundation  or  not  for  the  spirit  of  jealousy  excited  in 

her  husband,  and  to  prevent  an  unrighteous  severance  of  the  divinely  ■] 

appointed  marriage,  was  to  let  the  thing  be  decided  by  the  verdict 

of  God  Himself.     To  this  end  the  man  was  to  brinor  liis  wife  to  the 
I      .  .  ...  .       . 

I  priest  with  a  sacrificial  gift,  which  is  expressly  called  •^J?"!iJ,  her 

j  offering,  brought  n^y  "  on  her  account,"  that  is  to  say,  with  a  rneat- 

'  offering,  the  symbol  of  the  fruit  of  her  walk  and  conduct  before 

God.     Being  the  sacrificial  gift  of  a  wife  who  had  gone  aside  and 

w^as  suspected  of  adultery,  this  meat-offering  could  not  possess  the 

character  of  the  ordinary  meat-offerings,  which  shadowed  forth  the 

fruit  of  the  sanctification  of  life  in  good  works  (vol.  ii.  p.  207);  could 

not  consist,  that  is  to  say,  of  fine  wheaten  flour,  but  only  of  barley 

meal.     Barley  was  worth  only  half  as  much  as  wheat  (2  Kings  vii. 

1,  16,  18),  so  that  only  the  poorer  classes,  or  the  people  generally  in 

times  of  great  distress,  used  barley  meal  as  their  daily  food  (Judg. 

vii.  13 ;  2  Kings  iv.  42  ;  Ezek.  iv.  12  ;  John  vi.  9,  13),  whilst  those 

who  were  better  off  used  it  for  fodder  (1  Kings  v.  8).    Barley  meal 

was  prescribed  for  this  sacrifice,  neither  as  a  sign  that  the  adulteress 

had  conducted  herself  like  an  irrational  animal  (Philo,  Jonathan, 

Talm.y  the  Rabb.,  etc.),  nor  "  because  the  persons  presenting  the 


CHAP.  V.  lG-22.  31 

offering  were  invoking  the  punishment  of  a  crime,  and  not  the 
favour  of  God"  (Cler.,  i?os.)  :  for  the  guilt  of  the  woman  was  not 
yet  estabhshed ;  nor  even,  taking  a  milder  view  of  the  matter,  to 
indicate  that  the  offerer  might  be  innocent,  and  in  that  case  no 
offerinnr  at  all  was  required  (Knobel),  but  to  represent  the  question- 
able repute  in  which  the  woman  stood,  or  the  ambiguous,  suspicious 
cliaracter  of  her  conduct.  Because  such  conduct  as  hers  did  not 
proceed  from  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  was  not  carried  out  in  prayer : 
oil  and  incense,  the  symbols  of  the  Spirit  of  God  and  prayer  (see 
vol.  ii.  pp.  174  and  209),  were  not  to  be  added  to  her  offering.  It 
was  an  offering  of  jealousy  (^^Ji?,  an  intensive  plural),  and  tlie 
object  was  to  bring  the  ground  of  that  jealousy  to  light ;  and  in  this 
respect  it  is  called  the  "  meat-offering  of  remembrance"  sc,  of  the 
woman,  before  Jehovah  (cf.  chap.  x.  10,  xxxi.  54 ;  Ex.  xxviii.  12, 
29,  XXX.  16 ;  Lev.  xxiii.  24),  namely,  "  the  remembrance  of  iniquity j'^ 
bringing  her  crime  to  remembrance  before  the  Lord,  that  it  might 
be  judged  by  Him. 

Vers.  16-22.  The  priest  was  to  bring  her  near  to  the  altar  at 
which  he  stood,  and  place  her  before  Jehovah,  who  had  declared 
Himself  to  be  present  at  the  altar,  and  then  to  take  lioly  water, 
probably  water  out  of  the  basin  before  the  sanctuary,  which  served 
for  holy  purposes  (Ex.  xxx.  18),  in  an  earthen  vessel,  and  put  dust 
in  it  from  the  floor  of  the  dwelling.  He  was  then  to  loosen  the 
]iair  of  the  woman  who  was  standing  before  Jehovah,  and  place 
the  jealousy-offering  in  her  hands,  and  holding  the  water  in  his  own 
hand,  to  pronounce  a  solemn  oath  of  purification  before  her,  which 
she  had  to  appropriate  to  herself  by  a  confirmatory  Amen,  Amen. 
The  water,  which  the  priest  had  prepared  for  the  woman  to  drink, 
was  taken  from  the  sanctuary,  and  the  dust  to  be  put  into  it  from 
the  floor  of  the  dwelling,  to  impregnate  this  dnnk  with  the  power  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  that  dwelt  in  the  sanctuary.  The  dust  was  strewed 
upon  the  water,  not  to  indicate  that  man  was  formed  from  dust 
and  must  return  to  dust  again,  but  as  an  allusion  to  the  fact,  that 
dust  was  eaten  by  the  serpent  (Gen.  iii.  14)  as  the  curse  of  sin, 
and  therefore  as  the  symbol  of  a  state  deserving  a  curse,  a  state  of 
the  deepest  humiliation  and  disgrace  (Micah  vii.  17  ;  Isa.  xlix.  23  ; 
Ps.  Ixxii.  9).  On  the  very  same  ground,  an  earthen  vessel  was 
chosen  ;  that  is  to  say,  one  quite  worthless  in  comparison  with  the 
copper  one.  The  loosening  of  the  hair  of  the  head  (see  Lev.  xiii. 
45),  in  other  cases  a  sign  of  mourning,  is  to  be  regarded  here  as  a 
removal  or  loosening  of  the  female  head-dress,  and  a  symbol  of  the 


32  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

loss  of  the  proper  ornament  of  female  morality  and  conjugal 
fidelity.  During  the  administration  of  the  oath,  the  offering  was 
placed  in  her  hands,  that  she  might  bring  the  fruit  of  her  own 
conduct  before  God,  and  give  it  up  to  His  holy  judgment.  The 
priest,  as  the  representative  of  God,  held  the  vessel  in  his  hand, 
with  the  water  in  it,  which  was  called  the  "  icater  of  bitterness,  the 
curse-bringing"  inasmuch  as,  if  the  crime  imputed  to  her  was  well- 
founded,  it  would  bring  upon  the  woman  bitter  suffering  as  the 
curse  of  God. — Ver.  19.  The  oath  which  the  priest  required  her  to 
take  is  called,  in  ver.  21,  f^^^*}  ^V?^j  "  oath  of  cursing"  (see  Gen. 
xxvi.  28)  ;  but  it  first  of  all  presupposes  the  possibility  of  the  woman 
being  innocent,  and  contains  the  assurance,  that  in  that  case  the 
curse-water  would  do  her  no  harm.  "  If  no  (other)  man  has  lain 
with  thee,  and  thou  hast  not  gone  aside  to  union  (nxpp,  accus.  of  more 
precise  definition,  as  in  Lev.  xv.  2,  18),  under  thy  husband,"  i.e.  as 
a  wife  subject  to  thy  husband  (Ezek.  xxiii.  5  ;  Hos.  iv.  12),  "  then 
remain  free  from  the  water  of  bittermess,  this  curse-bringing"  i.e.  from 
the  effects  of  this  curse-water.  The  imperative  is  a  sign  of  certain 
assurance  (see  Gen.  xii.  2,  xx.  7  ;  cf.  Ges.  §  130,-  1).  "  But  if 
thou  hast  gone  aside  under  thy  husband,  if  thou  hast  defiled  thyself, 
and  a  man  has  given  thee  his  seed  beside  thy  husband,"  .  .  .  (the 
priest  shall  proceed  to  say ;  this  is  the  meaning  of  the  repetition  of 
riK^N?  .  .  .  y^ac^rn,  ver.  21),  '^  Jehovah  shall  make  thee  a  curse  and  an 
oath  among  thy  people,  by  making  thy  hip  to  fall  and  thy  belly  to  swell; 
and  this  curse-bringing  xoater  shall  come  into  thy  bowels,  to  make  the 
belly  to  vanish  and  the  hip  to  fall."  To  this  oath  that  was  spoken 
before  her  the  woman  was  to  reply,  "  true,  true,"  or  "  truly,  truly," 
and  thus  confirm  it  as  taken  by  herself  (cf.  Dent,  xxvii.  15  sqq. ; 
Neh.  V.  13).  It  cannot  be  determined  with  any  certainty  what 
was  the  nature  of  the  disease  threatened  in  this  curse.  Michaelis 
supposes  it  to  be  dropsy  of  the  ovary  (Jiydrops  ovarii),  in  which  a 
tumour  is  formed  in  the  place  of  the  ovarium,  which  may  even 
swell  so  as  to  contain  100  lbs.  of  fluid,  and  with  which  the  patient 
becomes  dreadfully  emaciated.  Josephus  says  it  is  ordinary  dropsy 
(hydrops  ascites:  Ant.  iii.  11,  6).  At  any  rate,  the  idea  of  the 
curse  is  this:  At  wv  <yap  tj  afULpTia,  Sea  tovtcov  rj  TLficopla  ("  the 
punishment  shall  come  from  the  same  source  as  the  sin,"  Theodoret). 
The  punishment  was  to  answer  exactly  to  the  crime,  and  to  fall 
upon  those  bodily  organs  which  had  been  the  instruments  of  the 
w^oman's  sin,  viz.  the  organs  of  child-bearing. 

Vers.  23-28.  After  the  woman's  Amen,  the  priest  was  to  write 


I 


CHAP.  V.  29-31.  33 

^^  these  cursesy'  those  contained  in  the  oath,  in  a  book-roll,  and  wash 
them  in  the  bitter  water,  i.e.  wash  the  writing  in  the  vessel  with 
water,  so  that  the  words  of  the  curse  should  pass  into  the  water, 
and  be  imparted  to  it;  a  symbolical  act,  to  set  forth  the  truth, 
that  God  imparted  to  the  water  the  power  to  act  injuriously  upon 
a  guilty  body,  though  it  would  do  no  harm  to  an  innocent  one. 
The  remark  in  ver.  24,  that  the  priest  was  to  give  her  this  water  to 
drink,  is  anticipatory;  for  according  to  ver.  26  this  did  not  take 
place  till  after  the  presentation  of  the  sacrifice  and  the  burning  of 
the  memorial  of  it  upon  the  altar.  The  woman's  offering,  however, 
was  not  presented  to  God  till  after  the  oath  of  purification,  because 
it  was  by  the  oath  that  she  first  of  all  purified  herself  from  the  sus- 
picion of  adultery,  so  that  the  fruit  of  her  conduct  could  be  given 
up  to  the  fire  of  the  holiness  of  God.  As  a  known  adulteress,  she 
could  not  have  offered  a  meat-offering  at  all.  But  as  the  suspicion 
which  rested  upon  her  was  not  entirely  removed  by  her  oath,  since 
she  might  have  taken  a  false  oath,  the  priest  was  to  give  her  the 
curse-water  to  drink  after  the  offering,  that  her  guilt  or  innocence 
might  be  brought  to  light  in  the  effects  produced  by  the  drink. 
This  is  given  in  ver.  27  as  the  design  of  the  course  prescribed : 
"  When  he  hath  made  her  to  drink  the  water,  then  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  that  if  she  he  defiled,  and  have  done  trespass  against  her  husband, 
the  water  that  causeth  the  curse  shall  come  (enter)  into  her  as  bitter- 
ness (i.e.  producing  bitter  sufferings),  namely,  her  belly  shall  swell 
and  her  hip  vanish :  and  so  the  woman  shall  become  a  curse  in  the  midst 
of  her  peopled — Ver.  28.  "  But  if  she  have  not  defiled  herself,  and 
is  clean  (from  the  crime  of  which  she  was  suspected),  she  will  remain 
free  (from  the  threatened  punishment  of  God),  and  will  conceive 
seed,'^  i.e.  be  blessed  with  the  capacity  and  power  to  conceive  and 
bring  forth  children. 

Vers.  29-31  bring  the  law  of  jealousy  to  a  formal  close,  with  the 
additional  remark,  that  the  man  who  adopted  this  course  with  a  wife 
suspected  of  adultery  was  free  from  sin,  but  the  woman  w^ould  bear 
her  guilt  (see  Lev.  v.  1),  i.e.  in  case  she  were  guilty,  would  bear  the 
punishment  threatened  by  God.  Nothing  is  said  about  what  was 
to  be  done  in  case  the  woman  refused  to  take  the  oath  prescribed, 
because  that  would  amount  to  a  confession  of  her  guilt,  when  she 
would  have  to  be  put  to  death  as  an  adulteress,  according  to  the 
law  in  Lev.  xx.  10 ;  and  not  she  alone,  but  the  adulterer  also.  In 
the  law  just  mentioned  the  man  is  placed  on  an  equality  with  the 
woman  with  reference  to  the  sin  of  adultery  ;  and  thus  the  apparent 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  0 


[E  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

partiality,  that  a  man  could  sue  his  wife  for  adultery,  but  not  the 
wife  her  husband,  is  removed.  But  the  law  before  us  applied  to  the 
woman  only,  because  the  man  was  at  liberty  to  marry  more  than 
one  wife,  or  to  take  concubines  to  his  own  wife ;  so  that  he  only 
violated  the  marriage  tie,  and  was  guilty  of  adultery,  when  he 
formed  an  illicit  connection  with  another  man's  wife.  In  that  case, 
the  man  whose  marriage  had  been  violated  could  proceed  against 
his  adulterous  wife,  and  in  most  instances  convict  the  adulterer  also, 
in  order  that  he  might  receive  his  punishment  too.  For  a  really 
guilty  wife  would  not  have  made  up  her  mind  so  easily  to  take  the 
required  oath  of  purification,  as  the  curse  of  God  under  which  she 
came  was  no  easier  to  bear  than  the  punishment  of  death.  For  this 
law  prescribed  no  ordeal  whose  effects  were  uncertain,  like  the 
ordeals  of  other  nations,  but  a  judgment  of  God,  from  which  the 
guilty  could  not  escape,  because  it  had  been  appointed  by  the 
living  God. 

Chap.  vi.  1-21.  The  Nazarite. — The  legal  regulations  con- 
cerning the  vow  of  the  Nazarite  are  appended  quite  appropriately 
to  the  laws  intended  to  promote  the  spiritual  order  of  the  congre- 
gation of  Israel.  For  the  Nazarite  brought  to  light  the  priestly 
character'  of  the  covenant  nation  in  a  peculiar  form,  which  had 
necessarily  to  be  incorporated  into  the  spiritual  organization  of  the 
community,  so  that  it  might  become  a  means  of  furthering  the 
sanctification  of  the  people  in  covenant  with  the  Lord.^ 

Vers.  1  and  2.  The  words,  "  ^/'  a  man  or  woman  make  a  separate 
vow,  a  Nazarite  vow,  to  live  consecrated  to  the  Lord^*  with  which  the 
law  is  introduced,  show  not  only  that  the  vow  of  the  Nazarite  was 
a  matter  of  free  choice,  but  that  it  was  a  mode  of  practising  godli- 
ness and  piety  already  customary  among  the  people.  Nazir,  from 
"iti  to  separate,  lit,  the  separated,  is  applied  to  the  man  who  vowed 
that  he  would  make  a  separation  to  (for)  Jehovah,  i.e,  lead  a  sepa- 
rate life  for  the  Lord  and  His  service.  The  origin  of  this  custom 
is  involved  in  obscurity.  There  is  no  certain  clue  to  indicate  that 
it  was  derived  from  Egypt,  for  the  so-called  hair-offering  vows  are 
met  with  among  several  ancient  tribes  (see  the  proofs  in  Spencer,  de 
legg.  Hehr.  rit.  iv.  16,  and  Knohel  in  loc),  and  have  no  special  rela- 

^  The  rules  of  the  Talmud  are  found  in  the  tract.  Nasir  in  the  Mishnah. 
See  also  Lundius,  jud.  Heiligtliumer^  B.  iii.  p.  53.  jBaAr,  Symbolik,  ii.  pp.430sqq. ; 
Hengstenlerg^  Egypt  and  the  Books  of  Moses,  pp.  190  sqq.  My  Archaeologie,  i.  § 
67 :  and  Herzog's  Cyclopaedia. 


CHAP.  VI.  3-8.  35 

tionship  to  the  Nazarite,  whilst  vows  of  abstinence  were  common  to 
all  the  religions  of  antiquity.  The  Nazarite  vow  was  taken  at  first 
for  a  particular  time,  at  the  close  of  which  the  separation  terminated 
with  release  from  the  vow.  This  is  the  only  form  in  which  it  is 
taken  into  consideration,  or  rules  are  laid  down  for  it  in  the  law 
before  us.  In  after  times,  however,  we  find  life-long  Nazarites 
among  the  Israelites,  e.g.  Samson,  Samuel,  and  John  the  Baptist, 
who  were  vowed  or  dedicated  to  the  Lord  by  their  parents  even 
before  they  were  born  (Judg.  xiii.  5,  14 ;  1  Sam.  i.  11 ;  Luke  i.  15).^ 
Vers.  3-8.  The  vow  consisted  of  the  three  following  points, 
vers.  1-4 :  In  the  first  place,  he  was  to  abstain  from  wine  and 
intoxicating  drink  (shecar,  see  Lev.  x.  9)  ;  and  neither  to  drink 
vinegar  of  wine,  strong  drink,  nor  any  juice  of  the  grape  (lit.  dis- 
solving of  grapes,  i,e.  fresh  must  pressed  out),  nor  to  eat  fresh 
grapes,  or  di'ied  (raisins).  In  fact,  during  the  whole  period  of  his 
vow,  he  was  not  to  eat  of  anything  prepared  from  the  vine,  "  from 
the  kernels  even  to  the  husk^^  i,e,  not  the  smallest  quantity  of  the 
fruit  of  the  vine.  The  design  of  this  prohibition  can  hardly  have 
been,  merely  that,  by  abstaining  from  intoxicating  drink,  the  Naza- 
rite might  preserve  perfect  clearness  and  temperance  of  mind,  like 
the  priests  when  engaged  in  their  duties,  and  so  conduct  himself  as 
one  sanctified  to  the  Lord  {Bahr)  ;  but  it  goes  much  fm'ther,  and 
embraces  entire  abstinence  from  all  the  delicice  carnis  by  which 
holiness  could  be  impaired.  Vinegar,  fresh  and  dried  grapes,  and 
food  prepared  from  grapes  and  raisins,  e.g.  raisin-cakes,  are  not 
intoxicating ;  but  grape-cakes,  as  being  the  dainties  sought  after  by 
epicures  and  debauchees,  are  cited  in,gos^JiiJLas  a  symbol  of  the 
sensual  attractions  of  idolatry,  a  luxurious  kind  of  food,  that  was 
not  in  harmony  with  the  solemnity  of  the  worship  of  Jehovah.  The 
Nazarite  was  to  avoid  everything  that  proceeded  from  the  vine, 
because  its  fruit  was  regarded  as  the  sum  and  substance  of  all 
sensual  enjoyments. — Ver.  5.  Secondly,  during  the  whole  term  of 
his  vow  of  consecration,  no  razor  was  to  come  upon  his  head.  Till 
the  days  were  fulfilled  which  he  had  consecrated  to  the  Lord,  he 
was  to  be  holy,  "  to  make  great  the  free  growth  (see  Lev.  x.  6)  of 
the  hair  of  his  headV     The  free  growth  of  the  hair  is  called,  in 

*  This  is  also  related  by  Ilegesippus  (in  Euseh.  hist.  eccl.  ii.  23)  of  James  the 
Just,  the  first  bishop  of  Jerusalem.  On  other  cases  of  this  kind  in  the  Talmud, 
and  particularly  on  the  later  form  of  the  Xazarite  vow, — for  example,  that  of  the 
Apostle  Paul  (Acts  xviii,  18),— see  FV7ner,  bibl.  R.  W.  ii.  pp.  138-9,  and  Oehler 
in  Herzog's  Cycl. 


36  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

ver.  7,  "  the  diadem  of  his  God  upon  his  headj^  like  the  golden 
diadem  upon  the  turban  of  the  high  priest  (Ex.  xxix.  6),  and  the 
anointing  oil  upon  the  liigh  priest's  head  (Lev.  xxi.  12).  By  this 
he  sanctified  his  head  (ver.  11)  to  the  Lord,  so  that  the  consecration 
of  the  Nazarite  culminated  in  his  uncut  hair,  and  expressed  in  the 
most  perfect  way  the  meaning  of  his  vow  (Oehler).  Letting  the 
hair  grow,  therefore,  was  not  a  sign  of  separation,  because  it  was 
the  Israelitish  custom  to  go  about  with  the  hair  cut ;  nor  a  practical 
profession  of  a  renunciation  of  the  world,  and  separation  from 
human  society  (Hengstenberg,  pp.  190-1)  ;  nor  a  sign  of  abstinence 
from  every  appearance  of  self-gratification  (Baur  on  Amos  ii.  11)  ; 
nor  even  a  kind  of  humiliation  and  self-denial  {Lightfoot,  Carpzov. 
appar,  p.  154)  ;  still  less  a  "  sign  of  dependence  upon  some  other 
present  power'^  (M.  Baumgarten),  or  "  the  symbol  of  a  state  of 
perfect  liberty"  {Vitringa,  ohss.  ss,  1,  c.  6,  §  9;  cf.  vi.  22,  8).  The 
free  growth  of  the  hair,  unhindered  by  the  hand  of  man,  was  rather 
"  the  symbol  of  strength  and  abundant  vitality"  (cf.  2  Sam.  xiv. 
25,  26).  It  was  not  regarded  by  the  Hebrews  as  a  sign  of  sanctity, 
as  Bdhr  supposes,  but  simply  as  an  Ornament,  in  which  the  whole 
strength  and  fulness  of  vitality  were  exhibited,  and  which  the 
Nazarite  wore  in  honour  of  the  Lord,  as  a  sign  that  he  "  belonged 
to  the  Lord,  and  dedicated  himself  to  His  service,"  with  all  his 
vital  powers.^ — ^Vers.  6-8.  Because  the  Nazarite  wore  the  diadem 
of  his  God  upon  his  head  in  the  growth  of  his  hair,  and  was  holy 
to  the  Lord  during  the  whole  period  of  his  consecration,  he  was  to 
approach  no  dead  person  during  that  time,  not  even  to  defile  him- 
self for  his  parents,  or  his  brothers  and  sisters,  when  they  died, 
according  to-  the  law  laid  down  for  the  high  priest  in  Lev.  xxi.  11. 
Consequently,  as  a  matter  of  course,  he  was  to  guard  most  scrupu- 
lously against  other  defilements,  not  only  like  ordinary  Israelites, 
but  also  like  the  priests.  Samson's  mother,  too,  was  not  allowed  to 
eat  anything  unclean  during  the  period  of  her  pregnancy  (Judg. 
xiii.  4,  7,  14). 

Vers.  9-12.  But  if  any  one  died  suddenly  in  a  moment  "  by 
him"  (V^y,  in  his  neighbourhood),  and  he  therefore  involuntarily 

^  In  support  of  this  explanation,  Oeliler  calls  to  mind  those  heathen  hair- 
offerings  of  the  Athenian  youths,  for  example  {Plut.  Thes.  c.  5),  which  were 
founded  upon  the  idea,  that  the  hair  in  general  was  a  symbol  of  vital  power, 
and  the  hair  of  the  beard  a  sign  of  virility;  and  also  more  especially  the 
example  of  Samson,  whose  hair  was  not  only  the  symbol,  but  the  vehicle,  of  the 
power  which  fitted  him  to  be  the  deliverer  of  his  people 


CHAP.  Vr.  9-12.  37 

defiled  his  consecrated  head,  he  was  to  shave  his  head  on  the  day  of 
his  purification,  i.e,  on  the  seventh  day  (see  chap.  xix.  11,  14,  16, 
and  19),  not  "because  such  uncleanness  was  more  especially  caught 
and  retained  by  the  hair,"  as  Knohel  fancies,  but  because  it  was  the 
diadem  of  his  God  (ver.  7),  the  ornament  of  his  condition,  which 
was  sanctified  to  God.  On  the  eighth  day,  that  is  to  say,  on  the 
day  after  the  legal  purification,  he  was  to  bring  to  the  priest  at  the 
tabernacle  two  turtle-doves  or  young  pigeons,  that  he  might  make 
atonement  for  him  (see  at  Lev.  xv.  14,  15,  29  sqq.,  xiv.  30,  31,  and 
xii.  8),  on  account  of  his  having  been  defiled  by  a  corpse,  by  pre- 
paring the  one  as  a  sin-offering,  and  the  other  as  a  burnt-offering ; 
he  was  also  "  to  sanctify  his  head  that  same  day^^  i.e.  to  consecrate 
it  to  God  afresh,  by  the  unimpeded  growth  of  his  hair. — Ver.  12. 
He  was  then  "  to  consecrate  to  Jehovah  the  days  of  his  consecration,^^ 
i.e.  to  commence  afresh  the  time  of  dedication  that  he  had  vowed, 
and  "  to  bring  a  yearling  sheep  as  a  trespass-offering ;"  and  the  days 
that  were  before  were  "  to  fall,'^  i.e.  the  days  of  consecration  that 
had  already  elapsed  were  not  to  be  reckoned  on  account  of  their 
having  fallen,  "  because  his  consecration  had  become  uncleanJ*  He 
was  therefore  to  commence  the  whole  time  of  his  consecration 
entirely  afresh,  and  to  observe  it  as  required  by  the  vow.  To  this 
end  he  was  to  bring  a  trespass-offering,  as  a  payment  or  recompense 
for  being  reinstated  in  the  former  state  of  consecration,  from  which 
he  had  fallen  through  his  defilement,  but  not  as  compensation  "  for 
having  prolonged  the  days  of  separation  through  his  carelessness 
with  regard  to  the  defilement ;  that  is  to  say,  for  having  extended 
the  time  during  which  he  led  a  separate,  retired,  and  inactive  life, 
and  suspended  his  duties  to  his  own  family  and  the  congregation, 
thus  doing  an  injury  to  them,  and  incurring  a  debt  in  relation  to 
them  through  his  neglect"  (Knobel).  For  the  time  that  the  Naza- 
rite  vow  lasted  was  not  a  lazy  life,  involving  a  withdrawal  from 
the  duties  of  citizenship,  by  which  the  congregation  might  be  in- 
jured, but  was  perfectly  reconcilable  with  the  performance  of  aJl 
domestic  and  social  duties,  the  burial  of  the  dead  alone  excepted ; 
and  no  harm  could  result  from  this,  either  to  his  own  relations  or 
the  community  generally,  of  sufficient  importance  to  require  that 
the  omission  should  be  repaired  by  a  trespass-offering,  from  which 
neither  his  relatives  nor  the  congregation  derived  any  actual  advan- 
tage. Nor  was  it  a  species  of  fine,  for  having  deprived  Jehovah  of 
the  time  dedicated  to  Him  through  the  breach  of  the  vow,  or  for 
withholding  the  payment  of  his  vow  for  so  much  longer  a  time 


38  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

(OeJiler  in  Herzog).  For  the  position  of  a  Nazarite  was  only 
assumed  for  a  definite  period,  according  to  the  vow ;  and  after  this 
had  been  interrupted,  it  had  to  be  commenced  again  from  the  verv' 
beginning :  so  that  tlie  time  dedicated  to  God  was  not  shortened 
in  any  way  by  the  interruption  of  the  period  of  dedication,  and 
nothing  whatever  was  withheld  from  God  of  what  had  been  vowed 
to  Him,  so  as  to  need  the  presentation  of  a  trespass-offering  as  a 
compensation  or  fine.  And  there  is  no  more  reason  for  saying  that  fll 
the  payment  of  the  vow  was  withheld,  inasmuch  as  the  vow  was  "■ 
fulfilled  or  paid  by  the  punctual  observance  of  the  three  things  of 
which  it  was  composed ;  and  the  sacrifices  to  be  presented  after  the 
time  of  consecration  was  over,  had  not  in  the  least  the  character  of 
a  payment,  but  simply  constituted  a  solemn  conclusion,  correspond- 
ing to  the  idea  of  the  consecration  itself,  and  were  the  means  by 
which  the  Nazarite  came  out  of  his  state  of  consecration,  without 
involving  the  least  allusion  to  satisfaction,  or  reparation  for  any 
wrong  that  had  been  done.  fl 

The  position  of  the  Nazarite,  therefore,  as  Fhilo,  Maimonides, 
and  others  clearly  saw,  was  a  condition  of  life  consecrated  to  the 
Lord,  resembling  the  sanctified  relation  in  which  the  priests  stood 
to  Jehovah,  and  differing  from  the  priesthood  solely  in  the  fact  that 
it  involved  no  official  service  at  the  sanctuary,  and  was  not  based    ^ , 
upon  a  divine  calling  and  institution,  but  was  undertaken  sponta-    H 
neously  for  a  certain  time  and  through  a  special  vow.     The  object 
was  simply  the  realization  of  the  idea  of  a  priestly  life,  with  its 
purity  and  freedom  from  all  contamination  from  everything  con- 
nected with  death  and  corruption,  a  self-surrender  to  God  stretching 
beyond  the  deepest  earthly  ties,  "a  spontaneous  appropriation  of 
what  was  imposed  upon  the  priest  by  virtue  of  the  calling  connected 
with  his  descent,  namely,  the  obligation  to  conduct  himself  as  a    I 
person  betrothed  to  God,  and  therefore  to  avoid  everything  that     "' 
would  be  opposed  to  such  surrender"  (Oehler).     In  this  respect  the 
Nazarite' s  sanctification  of  life  was  a  step  towards  the  realization  of 
the  priestly  character,  which  had  been  set  before  the  whole  nation 
as  its  goal  at  the  time  of  its  first  calling  (Ex.  xix.  5)  ;  and  although 
it  was  simply  the  performance  of  a  vow,  and  therefore  a  work  of 
perfect  spontaneity,  it  was  also  a  work  of  the  Spirit  of  God  which 
dwelt  in  the  congregation  of  Israel,  so  that  Amos  could  describe  the 
raising  up  of  Nazarites  along  with  prophets  as  a  special  manifesta-    fl 
tion  of  divine  grace.   The  offerings,  with  which  the  vow  was  brought 
to  a  close  after  the  time  of  consecration  had  expired,  and  the  Nazarite 


J 


CHAP.  VI.  13-21.  39 

was  released  from  his  consecration,  also  corresponded  to  the  character 
we  have  described. 

Vers.  13-21.  The  directions  as  to  the  release  from  consecration 
are  called  "  the  law  of  the  Nazarite "  (ver.  13),  because  the  idea 
of  the  Nazarite's  vows  culminated  in  the  sacrificial  festival  which 
terminated  the  consecration,  and  it  was  in  this  that  it  attained  to 
its  fullest  manifestation.  "  On  the  day  of  the  completion  of  the  days 
of  his  consecration^^  i.e.  on  the  day  when  the  time  of  consecration 
expired,  the  Nazarite  was  to  bring  to  the  tabernacle,  or  offer  as  his 
gifts  to  the  Lord,  a  sheep  of  a  year  old  as  a  burnt-offering,  and  an 
ewe  of  a  year  old  as  a  sin-offering ;  the  latter  as  an  expiation  for 
the  sins  committed  involuntarily  during  the  period  of  consecration, 
the  former  as  an  embodiment  of  that  surrender  of  himself,  body 
and  soul,  to  the  Lord,  upon  which  every  act  of  worship  should  rest. 
In  addition  to  this  he  was  to  brincr  a  ram  without  blemish  as  a 
peace-offering,  together  with  a  basket  of  unleavened  cakes  and 
wafers  baked,  which  were  required,  according  tg-Lev.  vii.  12,  for 
every  praise-offering,  "  and  their  meat  and  dnnh-ojferings^^  i.e.  the 
gifts  of  meal,  oil,  and  wine,  which  belonged,  according  to  chap.  xv.  3 
sqq.,  to  the  burnt-offerings  and  peace-offerings. — Ver.  16.  The  sin- 
offering  and  burnt-offerinfif  were  carried  out  according  to  the  general 
instructions. — Ver.  17.  The  completion  of  the  consecration  vow  was 
concentrated  in  the  preparation  of  the  ram  and  the  basket  of  un- 
leavened bread  for  the  peace-offering,  along  with  the  appropriate 
meat-offering  and  drink-offering. — Ver.  18.  The  Nazarite  had  also 
to  shave  his  consecrated  head,  and  put  the  hair  into  the  altar-fire 
under  the  peace-offering  that  was  burning,  and  thus  hand  over  and 
sacrifice  to  the  Lord  the  hair  of  his  head  which  had  been  worn  in 
honour  of  Him. — Vers.  19,  20.  When  this  had  been  done,  the  priest 
took  the  boiled  shoulderof  the  ram,with  an  unleavened  cake  and  wafer 
out  of  the  basket,  and  placed  these  pieces  in  the  hands  of  the  Nazarite, 
and  waved  them  before  Jehovah.  They  then  became  the  portion  of 
the  priest,  in  addition  to  the  wave-breast  and  heave-leg  which  fell  to 
the  priest  in  the  case  of  every  peace-offering  (Lev.  vii.  32-34),  to  set 
forth  the  participation  of  the  Lord  in  the  sacrificial  meal  (see  vol. 
ii.  pp.  329,  330).  But  the  fact  that,  in  addition  to  these,  the  boiled 
shoulder  was  given  up  symbolically  to  the  Lord  through  the  process 
of  waving,  together  with  a  cake  and  wafer,  was  intended  to  indicate 
that  the  table-fellowship  with  the  Lord,  shadowed  forth  in  the  sacri- 
ficial meal  of  the  peace-offering,  took  place  here  in  a  higher  degree ; 
inasmuch  as  the  Lord  directed  a  portion  of  the  Nazarite's  meal  to 


40  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


be  handed  over  to  His  representatives  and  servants  for  them  to  eat 
that  he  might  thus  enjoy  the  blessedness  of  having  fellowship  with 
his  God,  in  accordance  with  that  condition  of  priestly  sanctity  into 
which  the  Nazarite  had  entered  through  the  vow  that  he  had  made. 
— Ver.  20.  ''After  that  the  Nazarite  may  drink  wine  "  (again),  pro- 
bably at  the  sacrificial  meal,  after  the  Lord  had  received  His  share 
of  the  sacrifice,  and  his  release  from  consecration  had  thus  been 
completed. — Ver.  21.  "  This  is  the  law  of  the  Nazarite,  who  vowed 
his  sacrificial  gifts  to  the  Lord  on  the  ground  of  his  consecration,^^  i.e, 
Avho  offered  his  sacrifice  in  accordance  with  the  state  of  a  Nazarite 
into  which  he  had  entered.  For  the  sacrifices  mentioned  in  vers. 
14  sqq.  were  not  the  object  of  a  special  vow,  but  contained  in  the 
vow  of  the  Nazarite,  and  therefore  already  vowed  (Knohel).  "  Be- 
side lohat  his  hand  grasps^^  i.e.  what  he  is  otherwise  able  to  perform 
Xev.  V.  11),  ''according  to  the  measure  of  his  vow,  which  he  vowed, 
so  must  he  do  according  to  the  law  of  his  consecration,"  i.e.  he  had  to 
offer  the  sacrifices  previously  mentioned  on  the  ground  of  his  conse- 
cration vow.  Beyond  that  he  was  free  to  vow  anything  else  accord- 
ing to  his  ability,  to  present  other  sacrificial  gifts  to  the  Lord  for 
His  sanctuary  and  His  servants,  which  did  not  necessarily  belong 
to  the  vow  of  the  Nazarite,  but  were  frequently  added.  From  this 
the  custom  afterwards  grew  up,  that  when  poor  persons  took  the 
Nazarite's  vow  upon  them,  those  who  were  better  off  defrayed  the 
expenses  of  the  sacrifices  (Acts  xxi.  24 ;  Josephus,  Ant.  xix.  6,  1 ; 
Mishnah  Nasir,  ii.  5  sqq.). 

Vers.  22-27.  The  Priestly  or  Aaronic  Blessing. — The 
spiritual  character  of  the  congregation  of  Israel  culminated  in  the 
blessing  with  which  the  priests  were  to  bless  the  people.  The 
directions  as  to  this  blessing,  therefore,  impressed  the  seal  of  per- 
fection upon  the  whole  order  and  organization  of  the  people  of 
God,  inasmuch  as  Israel  was  first  truly  formed  into  a  congregation 
of  Jehovah  by  the  fact  that  God  not  only  bestowed  His  blessing 
upon  it,  but  placed  the  communication  of  this  blessing  in  the  hands 
of  the  priests,  the  chosen  and  constant  mediators  of  the  blessings  of 
His  grace,  and  imposed  it  upon  them  as  one  portion  of  their  official 
duty.  The  blessing  which  the  priests  were  to  impart  to  the  people, 
consisted  of  a  triple  blessing  of  two  members  each,  w^hich  stood 
related  to  each  other  thus:  The  second  in  each  case  contained  a 
special  application  of  the  first  to  the  people,  and  the  three  grada- 
tions unfolded  the  substance  of  the  blessing  step  by  step  with  ever 


4 

at,   f  I 


J 


CHAP.  VI.  22-27.  41 

increasing  emphasis. — The  first  (ver.  24),  '^Jehovah  bless  thee  and 
keep  thee,^  conveyed  the  blessing  in  the  most  general  form,  merely 
describing  it  as  coming  from  Jehovah,  and  setting  forth  preserva- 
tion from  the  evil  of  the  world  as  His  work.  "The  blessing  of 
God  is  the  goodness  of  God  in  action,  by  which  a  supply  of  all  good 
pours  down  to  us  from  His  good  favour  as  from  their  only  foun- 
tain ;  then  follows,  secondly,  the  prayer  that  He  would  keep  the 
people,  which  signifies  that  He  alone  is  the  defender  of  the  Church, 
and  that  it  is  He  who  preserves  it  with  His  guardian  care"  (^Calvin). 
— The  second  (ver.  25),  '' Jehovah  mahe  His  face  shine  upon  thee, 
and  be  gracious  unto  thee"  defined  the  blessing  more  closely  as  the 
manifestation  of  the  favour  and  grace  of  God.  The  face  of  God 
is  the  personality  of  God  as  turned  towards  man.  Fire  goes  out 
from  Jehovah's  face,  and  consumes  the  enemy  and  the  rebellious 
(Lev.  X.  2,  cf.  xvii.  10,  xx.  3 ;  Ex.  xiv.  24 ;  Ps.  xxxiv.  17),  and 
also  a  sunlight  shining  with  love  and  full  of  life  and  good  (Deut. 
XXX.  30;  Ps.  xxvii.  1,  xliii.  3,  xliv.  4).  If  "  the  light  of  the  sun 
is  sweet,  and  pleasant  for  the  eyes  to  behold"  (Eccl.  xi.  7),  "the 
light  of  the  divine  countenance,  the  everlasting  light  (Ps.  xxxvi.  10), 
is  the  sum  of  all  delight"  (Baumcf.).  This  light  sends  rays  of 
mercy  into  a  heart  in  need  of  salvation,  and  makes  it  the  recipient 
of  grace. — The  third  (ver.  26),  '^Jehovah  lift  up  His  face  to  thee,  and 
set  (or  give)  thee  peace"  (g^^^y  salvation),  set  forth  the  blessing  of 
God  as  a  manifestation  of  power,  or  a  work  of  power  upon  man, 
the  end  of  which  is  peace  (shalom),  the  sum  of  all  the  good  which 
God  sets,  prepares,  or  establishes  for  His  people.  ?^  D'':q  fc^'^O^  to 
lift  up  the  face  to  any  one,  is  equivalent  to  looking  at  him,  and 
does  not  differ  from  n\y>V  fc^b'J  or  D^^^  (Gen.  xliii.  29,  xliv.  21).  When 
affirmed  of  God,  it  denotes  His  providential  work  upon  man.  When 
God  looks  at  a  man.  He  saves  him  out  of  his  distresses  (Ps.  iv.  7, 
xxxiii.  18,  xxxiv.  16). — In  these  three  blessings  most  of  the  fathers 
and  earlier  theologians  saw  an  allusion  to  the  mystery  of  the 
Trinity,  and  rested  their  conclusion,  (a)  upon  the  triple  repetition 
of  the  name  Jehovah ;  (b)  upon  the  ratio  prcedicati,  that  Jehovah, 
l)y  whom  the  blessing  is  desired  and  imparted,  is  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost ;  and  (c)  upon  the  distinctormn  benedict ioTiis  mem- 
brorum  consideration  according  to  which  bis  trina  beneficia  are  men- 
tioned (cf.  Calovii  Bibl.  illustr.  ad  h.  I.).  There  is'  truth  in  this, 
though  the  grounds  assigned  seem  faulty.  As  the  threefold  repeti- 
tion of  a  word  or  sentence  serves  to  express  the  thought  as  strongly 
as  possible  (cf.  Jer.  vii.  4,  xxii.  29),  the  triple  blessing  expressed  in 


42  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


n 


the  most  unconditional  manner  the  thought,  that  God  would  bestow 
upon  His  congregation  the  whole  fulness  of  the  blessing  enfolded 
in  His  Divine  Being  which  was  manifested  as  Jehovah.  But  not  ^d 
only  does  the  name  Jehovah  denote  God  as  the  absolute  Being,  ^| 
who  revealed  Himself  as  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit  in  the  historical 
development  of  His  purpose  of  salvation  for  the  redemption  of 
fallen  man  ;  but  the  substance  of  this  blessing,  which  He  caused 
to  be  pronounced  upon  His  congregation,  unfolded  the  grace  of 
God  in  the  threefold  way  in  which  it  is  communicated  to  us  through 
the  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit.^ — Yer.  27.  This  blessing  was  not  to 
remain  merely  a  pious  wish,  however,  but  to  be  manifested  in  the 
people  with  all  the  power  of  a  blessing  from  God.  This  assurance 
closes  the  divine  command :  "  Thei/  shall  put  My  name  upon  tht 
children  of  Israel^  and  I  will  bless  them" 


CLOSING  EVENTS  AT  SINAI. — CHAP.  VII.-IX.  14. 


i 


Chap.  vii.  Presentation  of  Dedicatory  Gifts  by  the 
Princes  of  the  Tribes. — Ver.  1.  This  presentation  took  place 
at  the  time  (DV)  when  Moses,  after  having  completed  the  erection 
of  the  tabernacle,  anointed  and  sanctified  the  dwelling  and  the  altar, 
together  with  their  furniture  (Lev.  viii.  10,  11).  Chronologically 
considered,  this  ought  to  have  been  noticed  after  Lev.  viii.  10.  But 
in  order  to  avoid  interrupting  the  connection  of  the  Sinaitic  laws, 
it  is  introduced  for  the  first  time  at  this  point,  and  placed  at  the 

^  See  the  admirable  elaboration  of  these  points  in  Luther's  exposition  of  the 
blessing.  Luther  refers  the  first  blessing  to  "  bodily  life  and  good."  The 
blessing,  he  says,  desired  for  the  people  "that  God  would  give  them  prosperity 
and  every  good,  and  also  guard  and  preserve  them."  This  is  carried  out  still 
further,  in  a  manner  corresponding  to  his  exposition  of  the  first  article.  The 
.second  blessing  he  refers  to  "  the  spiritual  nature  and  the  soul,"  and  observes, 
"  Just  as  the  sun,  when  it  rises  and  diffuses  its  rich  glory  and  soft  light  over  all 
the  world,  merely  lifts  up  its  face  upon  all  the  world  ;  ...  so  when  God  gives 
His  word.  He  causes  His  face  to  shine  clearly  and  joyously  upon  all  minds,  and 
makes  them  joyful  and  hght,  and  as  it  were  new  hearts  and  new  men.  For  it 
brings  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  shows  God  as  a  gracious  and  merciful  Father, 
who  pities  and  sympathizes  with  our  grief  and  sorrow.  The  third  also  relates 
to  the  spiritual  nature  and  the  soul,  and  is  a  desire  for  consolation  and  final 
victory  over  the  cross,  death,  the  devil,  and  all  the  gates  of  hell,  together  with 
the  world  and  the  evil  desires  of  the  flesh.  The  desire  of  this  blessing  is,  that 
the  Lord  God  will  lift  up  the  light  of  His  word  upon  us,  and  so  keep  it  over 
us,  that  it  may  shine  in  our  hearts  with  strength  enough  to  overcome  all  the 
opposition  of  the  devil,  death,  and  sin,  and  all  adversity,  terror,  or  despair." 


I 
I 


CHAP.  VII.  2-9.  43 

head  of  the  events  which  immediately  preceded  the  departure  of 
the  people  from  Sinai,  because  these  gifts  consisted  in  part  of 
materials  that  were  indispensably  necessary  for  the  transport  of  the 
tabernacle  durinsj  the  march  throutrh  the  desert.  Moreover,  there 
was  only  an  interval  of  at  the  most  forty  days  between  the  anoint- 
ing of  the  tabernacle,  which  commenced  after  the  first  day  of  the  first 
month  (cf.  Ex.  xl.  16  and  Lev.  viii.  10),  and  lasted  eight  days,  and 
the  departure  from  Sinai,  on  the  twentieth  day  of  the  second  month 
(chap.  X.  11),  and  from  this  we  have  to  deduct  six  days  for  the 
Passover,  which  took  place  before  their  departure  (chap.  ix.  1  sqq.)  ; 
and  it  was  within  this  period  that  the  laws  and  ordinances  from  Lev. 
xi.  to  Num.  vi.  had  to  be  published,  and  the  dedicatory  offerings 
to  be  presented.  Now,  as  the  presentation  itself  was  distributed, 
according  to  vers.  11  sqq.,  over  twelve  or  thirteen  days,  we  may  very 
well  assume  that  it  did  not  entirely  precede  the  publication  of  the 
laws  referred  to,  but  was  carried  on  in  part  contemporaneously  with 
it.  The  presentation  of  the  dedicatory  gifts  of  one  tribe-prince 
might  possibly  occupy  only  a  few  hours  of  the  day  appointed  for 
the  purpose ;  and  the  rest  of  the  day,  therefore,  might  very  conve- 
niently be  made  use  of  by  Moses  for  publishing  the  laws.  In  this 
case  the  short  space  of  a  month  and  a  few  days  would  be  amply 
sufficient  for  everything  that  took  place. 

Vers.  2-9.  The  presentation  of  six  waggons  and  tioelve  oxen  for 
the  carriage  of  the  materials  of  the  tabernacle  is  mentioned  first,  and 
was  no  doubt  the  first  thing  that  took  place.  The  princes  of  Israel, 
viz.  the  heads  of  the  tribe-houses  (fathers'  houses),  or  princes  of  the 
tribes  (see  chap.  i.  4  sqq.),  "  those  who  stood  over  those  that  were 
mimbered"  i.e.  who  were  their  leaders  or  rulers,  offered  as  their 
sacrificial  gift  six  covered  waggons  and  twelve  oxen,  one  ox  for 
each  prince,  and  a  waggon  for  every  two.  3^  TOV,  a/xd^a^  Xa^irrj- 
viKa<i  (LXX.),  i.e.  according  to  Euseh.  Emis.,  two-wheeled  vehicles, 
though  the  Greek  scholiasts  explain  \afjL7n]V7}  as  signifying  afj,a^a 
Trepc^av^f;,  PaaCkiKr}  and  piBtov  'rrept<})av6<;  6  iarlv  dp/jua  (TKeiraaTov 
(cf.  Schleussfier,  Lex.  in  LXX.  s.  v.),  and  Aqiiila,  a^a^ai  o-Keiraaraiy 
i.e.  plaustra  tecta  (  Vulg,  and  Rabh.).  The  meaning  "  litters,"  which 
Gesenius  and  De  Wette  support,  can  neither  be  defended  etymo- 
logically,  nor  based  upon  D'^^  in  Isa.  Ixvi.  20. — Vers.  4-6.  At  the 
command  of  God,  Moses  received  them  to  apply  them  to  the  pur- 
poses of  the  tabernacle,  and  handed  them  over  to  the  Levites,  "  to 
every  one  according  to  the  measure  of  his  servicer  i.e.  to  the  different 
classes  of  Levites,  according  to  the  requirements  of  their  respective 


44  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


■ 


I 


duties. — Vers.  7-9.  He  gave  two  waggons  and  four  oxen  to  the 
Gershonites,  and  four  waggons  and  eight  oxen  to  the  Merarites,  as 

the  former  had  less  weicjht  to  carry,  in  the  coverinfjs  and  curtains  , ; 

of  the  dwelHng  and  the  hangings  of  the  court,  than  the  latter,  who  ■| 
had  to  take  charge  of  the  beams  and  pillars  (chap.  iv.  24  sqq.,  31 
sqq.).  ''Under  the  hand  of  Ithamar^  (ver.  8)  ;  as  in  chap.  iv.  28, 
33.  The  Kohathites  received  no  waggon,  because  it  was  their 
place  to  attend  to  "  the  sanctuary"  (the  holy),  i.e.  the  holy  things, 
which  had  to  be  conveyed  u}X)n  their  shoulders,  and  were  provided 
with  poles  for  the  purpose  (chap.  iv.  4  sqq.). 

Vers.  10-88.  Presentation  of  dedicatory  gifts  for  the  altar. - 
Ver.  10.  Every  prince  offered  "  the  dedication  of  the  altar  j"*  i.e.  what 
served  for  the  dedication  of  the  altar,  equivalent  to  his  sacrificial 
gift  for  the  consecration  of  the  altar,  "  on  the  day^"*  i.e.  at  the  time, 
"  that  they  anointed  it^  "  Bay :"  as  in  Gen.  ii.  4.  Moses  was 
directed  by  God  to  receive  the  gifts  from  the  princes  on  separate 
days,  one  after  another ;  so  that  the  presentation  extended  over 
twelve  days.  The  reason  for  this  regulation  was  not  to  make  a 
greater  display,  as  Knohel  supposes,  or  to  avoid  cutting  short  the 
important  ceremony  of  consecration,  but  was  involved  in  the  very 
nature  of  the  gifts  presented.  Each  prince,  for  example,  offered, 
(1)  a  silver  dish  (kearah,  Ex.  xxv.  29)  of  130  sacred  shekels  weight, 
i.e.  about  4^  lbs. ;  (2)  a  silver  bowl  (mizrak,  sl  sacrificial  bowl,  not 
a  sacrificial  can,  or  wine-can,  as  in  Ex.  xxvii.  3)  of  70  shekels 
"weight,  both  filled  with  fine  flour  mixed  w^ith  oil  for  a  meat-offering ; 
(3)  a  golden  spoon  (caph,  as  in  Ex.  xxv.  29)  filled  with  incense  for 
an  incense-offering ;  (4)  a  bullock,  a  ram,  and  a  sheep  of  a  year  old 
for  a  burnt-offering ;  (5)  a  shaggy  goat  for  a  sin-offering  ;  (6)  two 
oxen,  five  rams,  five  he-goats,  and  five  sheep  of  a  year  old  for  a  peace- 
offering.  Out  of  these  gifts  the  fine  flour,  the  incense,  and  the 
sacrificial  animals  were  intended  for  sacrificing  upon  the  altar,  and 
that  not  as  a  provision  for  a  lengthened  period,  but  for  immediate 
use  in  the  way  prescribed.  This  could  not  have  been  carried  out 
if  more  than  one  prince  had  presented  his  gifts,  and  brought  them 
to  be  sacrificed  on  any  one  day.  For  the  limited  space  in  the  court 
of  the  tabernacle  would  not  have  allowed  of  252  animals  being 
received,  slaughtered,  and  prepared  for  sacrificing  all  at  once,  or  on 
the  same  day ;  and  it  would  have  been  also  impossible  to  burn  36 
whole  animals  (oxen,  rams,  and  sheep),  and  the  fat  portions  of  216 
animals,  upon  the  altar. — ^Vers.  12-83.  All  the  princes  brought  the 
same  gifts.     The  order  in  which  the  twelve  princes,  whose  names 


I 


CHAP.  VIII.  1-4.  45 

have  already  been  given  at  chap.  i.  5-15,  made  their  presentation, 
corresponded  to  the  order  of  the  tribes  in  the  camp  (chap,  ii.),  the 
tribe-prince  of  Judah  taking  the  lead,  and  the  prince  of  Naphtali 
comino"  last.  In  the  statements  as  to  the  weight  of  the  silver  kea- 
roth  and  the  golden  cappothy  the  word  shekel  is  invariably  omitted, 
as  in  Gen.  xx.  16,  etc. — In  vers.  84—86,  the  dedication  gifts  are 
summed  up,  and  the  total  weight  given,  viz.  twelve  silver  dishes  and 
twelve  silver  bowls,  weighing  together  2400  shekels,  and  twelve 
golden  spoons,  weighing  120  shekels  in  all.  On  the  sacred  shekel, 
see  at  Ex.  xxx.  13 ;  and  on  the  probable  value  of  the  shekel  of  gold, 
at  Ex.  xxxviii.  24,  25.  The  sacrificial  animals  are  added  together 
in  the  same  way  in  vers.  87,  88. 

Ver.  89.  Whilst  the  tribe-princes  had  thus  given  to  the  altar 
the  consecration  of  a  sanctuary  of  their  God,  through  their  sacri- 
ficial gifts,  Jehovah  acknowledged  it  as  His  sanctuary,  by  causing 
Moses,  when  he  went  into  the  tabernacle  to  speak  to  Him,  and  to 
present  his  own  entreaties  and  those  of  the  people,  to  hear  the  voice  of 
Him  that  spake  to  him  from  between  the  two  cherubim  upon  the  ark 
of  the  covenant.  The  suffix  in  W5^  points  back  to  the  name  Jeliovah, 
which,  though  not  expressly  mentioned  before,  is  contained  implicite 
in  ohel  moed,  "  the  tent  of  meeting."  For  the  holy  tent  became  an 
ohel  moed  first  of  all,  from  the  fact  that  it  was  there  that  Jehovah 
appeared  to  Moses,  or  met  with  him  pJ^^,  Ex.  xxv.  22).  ">2'^p,  part. 
Hithpaely  to  hold  conversation.  On  the  fact  itself,  see  the  explana- 
tion in  Ex.  xxv.  20,  22.  "  This  voice  from  the  inmost  sanctuary  to 
Moses,  the  representative  of  Israel,  was  Jehovah's  reply  to  the  joy- 
fulness  and  readiness  with  which  the  princes  of  Israel  responded  to 
Him,  and  made  the  tent,  so  far  as  they  were  concerned,  a  place  of 
holy  meeting"  (Baumg.).  This  was  the  reason  for  connecting  the 
remark  in  ver.  89  with  the  account  of  the  dedicatory  gifts. 

Chap.  viii.  Consecration  of  the  Levites. — The  command 
of  God  to  consecrate  the  Levites  for  their  service,  is  introduced  in 
vers.  1-4  by  directions  issued  to  Aaron  with  regard  to  the  lighting 
of  the  candlestick  in  the  dwelling  of  the  tabernacle.  Aaron  was  to 
place  the  seven  lamps  upon  the  candlestick  in  such  a  manner  that 
they  would  shine  1"':q  ^^D"7N.  These  directions  are  not  a  mere 
repetition,  but  also  a  more  precise  definition,  of  the  general  in- 
structions given  in  Ex.  xxv.  37,  when  the  candlestick  was  made,  to 
place  the  seven  lamps  upon  the  candlestick  in  such  a  manner  that 
each  should  give  light  over  against  its  front,  i.e,  should  throw  its 


46  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


light  upon  the  side  opposite  to  the  front  of  the  candlestick  (see  vol. 
ii.  p.  173).  In  itself,  therefore,  there  is  nothing  at  all  striking  in 
the  renewal  and  explanation  of  those  directions,  which  committed 
the  task  of  lighting  the  lamps  to  Aaron  ;  for  this  had  not  been 
done  before,  as  Ex.  xxvii.  21  merely  assigns  the  daily  preparation 
of  the  candlestick  to  Aaron  and  his  sons ;  and  their  being  placed 
in  the  connection  in  which  we  find  them  may  be  explained  from 
the  signification  of  the  seven  lamps  in  relation  to  the  dwelling  of 
God,  viz.  as  indicating  that  Israel  was  thereby  to  be  represented 
perpetually  before  the  Lord  as  a  people  causing  its  light  to  shine  in 
the  darkness  of  this  world  (vol.  ii.  p.  174).  And  when  Aaron  is 
commanded  to  attend  to  the  lighting  of  the  candlestick,  so  that  it 
may  light  up  the  dwelling,  in  these  special  instructions  the  entire  ^ 
fulfilment  of  his  service  in  the  dwelling  is  enforced  upon  him  as  afll 
duty.  In  this  respect  the  instructions  themselves,  coupled  with  the 
statement  of  the  fact  that  Aaron  had  fulfilled  them,  stand  quite 
appropriately  between  the  account  of  what  the  tribe-princes  had 
done  for  the  consecration  of  the  altar  service  as  representatives  of 
the  congregation,  and  the  account  of  the  solemn  inauguration  of 
the  Levites  in  their  service  in  the  sanctuary.  The  repetition  on 
this  occasion  (ver.  4)  of  an  allusion  to  the  artistic  character  of  the 
candlestick,  which  had  been  made  according  to  the  pattern  seen  by 
Moses  in  the  mount  (Ex.  xxv.  31  sqq.),  is  quite  in  keeping  with  the 
antiquated  style  of  narrative  adopted  in  these  books.  fl  j 

Vers.  5-22.  Consecration  of  the  Levites  for  their  service  in  the™ 
sanctuary. — The  choice  of  the  Levites  for  service  in  the  sanctuary, 
in  the  place  of  the  first-born  of  the  people  generally,  has  been 
already  noticed  in  chap.  iii.  5  sqq.,  and  the  duties  binding  upon 
them  in  chap.  iv.  4  sqq.  But  before  entering  upon  their  duties 
they  were  to  be  consecrated  to  the  work,  and  then  formally 
handed  over  to  the  priests.  This  consecration  is  commanded  in 
vers.  7  sqq.,  and  is  not  called  tJ^i?,  like  the  consecration  of  the 
priests  (Ex.  xxix.  1 ;  Lev.  viii.  11),  but  "in^,  to  cleanse.  It  con- 
sisted in  sprinkling  them  with  sin-water,  shaving  off  the  whole 
of  the  hair  from  their  bodies,  and  washing  their  clothes,  accom- 
panied by  a  sacrificial  ceremony,  by  which  they  were  presented 
symbolically  to  the  Lord  as  a  sacrifice  for  His  service.  The  first 
part  of  this  ceremony  had  reference  to  outward  purification,  and 
represented  cleansing  from  the  defilement  of  sin ;  hence  the  per- 
formance of  it  is  called  ^^Dnnri  (to  cleanse  from  sin)  in  ver.  21. 
"  Sprinkle  sin-water  upon  them^^   The  words  are  addressed  to  Moses, 


CHAP.  VIII.  5-22.  47 

who  had  to  officiate  at  the  inauguration  of  the  Levites,  as  he  had 
already  done  at  that  of  the  priests.  "  Water  of  sin^  is  water  having 
reference  to  sin,  designed  to  remove  it,  just  as  the  sacrifice  offered 
for  the  expiation  of  sin  is  called  riKlsn  (sin)  in  Lev.  iv.  14,  etc. ; 
whilst  the  "water  of  uncleanness"  in  chap.  xix.  9,  13,  signifies 
water  by  which  uncleanness  was  removed  or  wiped  away.  The 
nature  of  this  purifying  water  is  not  explained,  and  cannot  be 
determined  with  any  certainty.  We  find  directions  for  preparing 
sprinkling  water  in  a  peculiar  manner,  for  the  purpose  of  cleansing 
persons  who  were  cured  of  leprosy,  in  Lev.  xiv.  5  sqq.,  50  sqq. ;  and 
also  for  cleansing  both  persons  and  houses  that  had  been  defiled 
by  a  corpse,  in  chap.  xix.  9  sqq.  Neither  of  these,  however,  was 
applicable  to  the  cleansing  of  the  Levites,  as  they  were  both  of 
them  composed  of  significant  ingredients,  which  stood  in  the  closest 
relation  to  the  special  cleansing  to  be  effected  by  them,  and  had 
evidently  no  adaptation  to  the  purification  of  the  Levites.  At  the 
same  time,  the  expression  "  sin-water"  precludes  our  understanding 
it  to  mean  simply  clean  water.  So  that  nothing  remains  but  to 
regard  it  as  referring  to  the  water  in  the  laver  of  the  sanctuary, 
which  was  provided  for  the  purpose  of  cleansing  the  priests  for  the 
performance  of  their  duties  (Ex.  xxx.  18  sqq.),  and  might  therefore 
be  regarded  by  virtue  of  this  as  cleansing  from  sin,  and  be  called 
"  sin-water"  in  consequence.  "  And  they  shall  cause  the  razor  to 
pass  over  their  whole  body^^  i.e.  shave  off  all  the  hair  upon  their 
body,  ''and  wash  their  clothes^  and  so  cleanse  themselves."  "i^^  '^''?}!J?. 
is  to  be  distinguished  from  npa.  The  latter  signifies  to  make  bald 
or  shave  the  hair  entirely  off,  which  was  required  of  the  leper  when 
he  was  cleansed  (Lev.  xiv.  8,  9)  ;  the  former  signifies  merely  cut- 
ting the  hair,  wdiich  was  part  of  the  regular  mode  of  adorning  the 
body.  The  Levites  also  were  not  required  to  bathe  their  bodies,  as 
lepers  were  (Lev.  xiv.  8,  9),  and  also  the  priests  at  their  consecra- 
tion (Lev.  viii.  6),  because  they  were  not  affected  with  any  special 
uncleanness,  and  their  duties  did  not  require  them  to  touch  the 
most  holy  instruments  of  worship.  The  washing  of  the  clothes,  on 
the  other  hand,  was  a  thing  generally  required  as  a  preparation  for 
acts  of  worship  (Gen.  xxxv.  2  ;  Ex.  xix.  10),  and  was  omitted  in 
the  case  of  the  consecration  of  the  priests,  simply  because  they  re- 
ceived a  holy  official  dress,  ^^i^^^  for  ^'^l!?'??  as  in  2  Chron.  xxx.  18. 
— Ver.  8.  After  this  purification  the  Levites  were  to  bring  two 
young  bullocks,  one  with  the  corresponding  meat-offering  for  a 
burnt-sacrifice,  the  other  for  a  sin-offering. — Ver.  9.  Moses  was 


THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

then  to  cause  them  to  draw  near  before  the  tabernacle,  i.i 
the  court,  and  to  gather  together  the  whole  congregation  ui  xs-  m 
viz.  in  the  persons  of  their  heads  and  representatives. — Va^itted 
After  this  the  Levites  were  to  come  before  Jehovah,  i.e.  in  frgjeen 
the  altar ;  and  the  children  of  Israel,  i.e.  the  tribe-princes  intion 
name  of  the  Israelites,  were  to  lay  their  hands  upon  them,oed 
merely  "  as  a  sign  that  they  released  them  from  the  possessionm 
the  nation,  and  assigned  them  and  handed  them  over  to  Jehova^f 
{Knohel),  but  in  order  that  by  this  symbolical  act  they  might  tranS 
fer  to  the  Levites  the  obligation  resting  upon  the  whole  nation  tc 
serve  the  Lord  in  the  persons  of  its  first-born  sons,  and  might  pre- 
sent them  to  the  Lord  as  representatives  of  the  first-born  of  Israel, 
to  serve  Him  as  living  sacrifices. — Ver.  11.  This  transfer  was  to  be 
completed  by  Aaron's  waving  the  Levites  as  a  wave-offering  before 
Jehovah  on  behalf  of  the  children  of  Israel,  i.e.  by  his  offering 
them  symbolically  to  the  Lord  as  a  sacrifice  presented  on  the  part 
of  the  Israelites.  The  ceremony  of  waving  consisted  no  doubt  in 
his  conducting  the  Levites  solemnly  up  to  the  altar,  and  then  back 
again.  On  the  signification  of  the  verb,  see  at  Lev.  vii.  30.  The 
design  of  the  waving  is  given  in  ver.  11,  viz.  "  that  they  might  he  to 
perform  the  service  of  Jehovali^  (vers.  24—26  compared  with  chap, 
iv.  4-33). — Ver.  12.  The  Levites  were  then  to  close  this  transfer 
of  themselves  to  the  Lord  with  a  sin-offering  and  burnt-offering,  in 
which  they  laid  their  hands  upon  the  sacrificial  animals.  By  this 
imposition  of  hands  they  made  the  sacrificial  animals  their  repre- 
sentatives, in  which  they  presented  their  own  bodies  to  the  Lord  as 
a  living  sacrifice  well-pleasing  to  Him  (see  vol.  ii.  pp.  279,  280). 
The  signification  of  the  dedication  of  the  Levites,  as  here  enjoined, 
is  still  further  explained  in  vers.  13-19.  The  meaning  of  vers.  13 
sqq.  is  this :  According  to  the  command  already  given  (in  vers. 
6-12),  thou  shalt  place  the  Levites  before  Aaron  and  his  sons,  and 
wave  them  as  a  wave-offering  before  the  Lord,  and  so  separate  them 
from  the  midst  of  the  children  of  Israel,  that  they  may  be  Mine. 
They  shall  then  come  to  serve  the  tabernacle.  So  shalt  thou  cleanse 
them  and  wave  them.  The  same  reason  is  assigned  for  this  in  vers. 
16,  17,  as  in  chap.  iii.  11-13  (^3  "»i33  for  "»i23-b,  cf.  chap.  iii.  13) ; 
and  in  vers.  18  and  19,  what  was  commanded  in  chap.  iii.  6-9  is 
described  as  having  been  carried  out.  On  ver.  196  see  chap.  i.  53. 
— ^Vers.  20-22  contain  an  account  of  the  execution  of  the  divine 
command. 

Yers.  /^3-26.   The  Levitical  peiiod  of  service  is  fixed  here  at 


CHAP.  VIII.  23-26,  IX.  1-14.  49 

twenty-five  years  of  age  and  upwards  to  the  fiftieth  year.  "  This 
A  is  what  concerns  the  Levites^^  i.e.  what  follows  applies  to  the  Levites. 
Irt  "  From  the  age  of  twenty-five  years  shall  he  (the  Levite)  come  to  do 
ikre^service  at  the  work  of  the  tabernacle ;  and  at  fifty  years  of  age  shall 
If  tb  he  return  from  the  service  of  the  work,  and  not  work  any  further,  hut 
"  nly  serve  his  brethren  at  the  tabernacle  in  keeping  charge^*  i.g.  help 
liem  to  look  after  the  furniture  of  the  tabernacle.  "Charge" 
/  (mishmereth),  as  distinguished  from  "  work,"  signified  the  over- 
sight of  all  the  furniture  of  the  tabernacle  (see  chap.  iii.  8)  ; 
"  work"  (service)  applied  to  laborious  service,  e.g.  the  taking  down 
and  setting  up  of  the  tabernacle  and  cleaning  it,  carrying  wood 
and  water  for  the  sacrificial  worship,  slaying  the  animals  for  the 
daily  and  festal  sacrifices  of  the  congregation,  etc. — Ver.  2Qb.  "  So 
shalt  thou  do  to  the  Levites  {i.e.  proceed  with  them)  in  their  services. ^^ 
nipc^p  from  Tnom^  attendance  upon  an  official  post.  Both  the 
heading  and  final  clause,  by  which  this  law  relating  to  the  Levites' 
period  of  service  is  bounded,  and  its  position  immediately  after  the 
induction  of  the  Levites  into  their  office,  show  unmistakeably  that 
this  .law  was  binding  for  all  time,  and  was  intended  to  apply  to  the 
standing  service  of  the  Levites  at  the  sanctuary ;  and  consequently 
that  it  was  not  at  variance  with  the  instructions  in  chap,  iv.,  to 
muster  the  Levites  between  thirty  and  fifty  years  of  age,  and 
organize  them  for  the  transport  of  the  tabernacle  on  the  journey 
through  the  wilderness  (chap.  iv.  3-49).  The  transport  of  tiie 
tabernacle  required  the  strength  of  a  full-grown  man,  and  therefore 
the  more  advanced  age  of  thirty  years ;  whereas  the  duties  con- 
nected with  the  tabernacle  when  standing  were  of  a  lighter  descrip- 
tion, and  could  easily  be  performed  from  the  twenty-fifth  year  (see 
Hengstenberg' s  Dissertations,  vol.  ii.  pp.  321  sqq.).  At  a  later  period, 
when  the  sanctuary  was  permanently  established  on  Mount  Zion, 
l)avid  employed  the  Levites  from  their  twentieth  year  (1  Chron. 
xxiii.  24,  25),  and  expressly  stated  that  he  did  so  because  the 
Levites  had  no  longer  to  carry  the  dwelling  and  its  furniture ;  and 
this  regulation  continued  in  force  from  that  time  forward  (cf. 
2  Chron.  xxxi.  17  ;  Ezra  iii.  8).  But  if  the  supposed  discrepancy 
between  the  verses  before  us  and  chap.  iv.  3,  47,  is  removed  by  this 
distinction,  which  is  gathered  in  the  most  simple  manner  from  the 
context,  there  is  no  ground  whatever  for  critics  to  deny  that  the  regu- 
lation before  us  could  have  proceeded  from  the  pen  of  the  Elohist. 

Chap.  ix.  1-14.  The  Passover  at  Sinai,  and  Instructions 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  D 


BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


er 

I 


FOE  A  Supplementary  Passover. — Vers.  1-5.  On  the  fii 

stitution  of  the  Passover,  before  the  exodus  from  Efrypt,  Gc 
appointed  the  observance  of  this  feast  as  an  everlasting  statute  for 
all  future  generations  (Ex.  xii.  14,  24,  25).  In  the  first  month  of 
the  second  year  after  the  exodus,  that  is  to  say,  immediately  after 
the  erection  of  the  tabernacle  (Ex.  xl.  2,  17),  this  command  was 
renewed,  and  the  people  were  commanded  "  to  keep  the  Passover 
in  its  appointed  season,  according  to  all  its  statutes  and  rights ;"  n 
to  ])Ostpone  it,  that  is,  according  to  an  interpretation  that  mig 
possibly  have  been  put  upon  Ex.  xii.  24,  25,  until  they  came 
Canaan,  but  to  keep  it  there  at  Sinai.  And  Israel  kept  it  in  th6 
wilderness  of  Sinai,  in  exact  accordance  with  the  commands  which 
God  had  given  before  (Ex.  xii.).  There  is  no  express  command^ 
it  is  true,  that  the  blood  of  the  paschal  lambs,  instead  of  beinM 
smeared  upon  the  lintel  and  posts  of  the  house-doors  (or  the  en^ 
trances  to  the  tents),  was  to  be  sprinkled  upon  the  altar  of  burnt- 
offering  ;  nor  is  it  recorded  that  this  was  actually  done ;  but  it 
followed  of  itself  from  the  altered  circumstances,  inasmuch  as  the: 
was  no  destroying  angel  to  pass  through  the  camp  at  Sinai  an 
smite  the  enemies  of  Israel,  whilst  there  was  an  altar  in  existen 
now  upon  which  all  the  sacrificial  blood  was  to  be  poured  out,  an 
therefore  the  blood  of  the  paschal  sacrifice  also.^ 

Mf  wo  take  into  consideration  still  further,  the  fact  that  the  law  h 
already  been  issued  that  the  blood  of  all  the  animals  slain  for  food,  wheth 
inside  or  outside  the  camp,  was  to  be  sprinkled  upon  the  altar  (Lev.  xvii.  3-6 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  blood  of  the  paschal  lambs  would  also  have  to  bo 
sprinkled  upon  the  altar,  notwithstanding  the  diflBculties  referred  to  by  Kurt; 
arising  from  the  small  number  of  priests  to  perform  the  task,  viz.  Aaro 
Eleazar,  and  Ithamar,  as  Nadab  and  Abihu  were  now  dead.  But  (1)  Kur 
estimates  the  number  of  paschal  lambs  much  too  high,  viz.  at  100,000 
140,000  ;  for  when  he  reckons  the  whole  number  of  the  people  at  about  twi 
millions,  and  gives  one  lamb  upon  an  average  to  every  fifteen  or  twenty  person 
he  includes  infants  and  sucklings  among  those  who  partook  of  the  Passover^ 
But  as  there  were  only  603,550  males  of  twenty  years  old  and  upwards  in  th 
twelve  tribes,  we  cannot  reckon  more  than  about  700,000  males  as  participan 
in  the  paschal  meal,  since  the  children  under  ten  or  twelve  years  of  age  wouli 
not  come  into  the  calculation,  even  if  those  who  were  between  eight  and  twelve 
partook  of  the  meal,  since  there  would  be  many  adults  who  could  not  eat  t 
Passover,  because  they  were  unclean.  Now  if,  as  Josephus  affirms  {de  hell,  ju 
vi.  9,  3),  there  were  never  less  than  ten,  and  often  as  many  as  twenty,  wh 
joined  together  in  the  time  of  Christ  (qvk  t'huaaou  dvopuu  Hkoc  .  .  .  '^o'K'KoI  li 
xul  avv  u'kooiv  ddpol^ovreii),  WO  need  not  assume  that  there  were  more  than 
60,000  lambs  required  for  the  feast  of  Passover  at  Sinai ;  because  even  if  all 
the  women  who  were  clean  took  part  in  the  feast,  they  would  confine  tlicm- 


I 


CHAP.  IX.  6-14.  51 

Vers.  6-14.  There  were  certain  men  who  were  defiled  by  human 
corpses  (see  Lev.  xix.  28),  and  could  not  eat  the  Passover  on  the 
day  appointed.  These  men  came  to  Moses,  and  asked,  "  IVJii/  are 
we  dlinlnished  (prevented)  from  oj/ering  the  sacrificial  gift  of  Jehovah 
at  its  season  in  the  midst  of  the  children,  of  Israel  {i.e»  in  common 
with  the  rest  of  the  Israelites)  ?'*  Tiie  exclusion  of  persons  defiled 
from  offering  the  Passover  followed  from  the  law,  that  only  clean 
persons  were  to  participate  in  a  sacrificial  meal  (Lev.  vii.  21),  and 
that  no  one  could  offer  any  sacrifice  in  an  unclean  state. — Ver.  8. 
Moses  told  them  to  wait  (stand),  and  he  would  hear  what  the  Lord, 
of  whom  ho  would  inquire,  would  command. — Vers.  9  sqq.  Jehovah 
gave  these  general  instructions :  '''Every  one  xcho  is  defiled  by  a  corpse 
or  upon  a  distant^  journey^  of  you  and  your  future  families ^  shall  keep 
the  Passover  in  the  second  month  on  the  fourteenth,  between  the  two 
evenings"  and  that  in  all  respects  according  to  the  statute  of  this 
feast,  the  three  leading  points  of  which — viz.  eating  the  lamb  with 
unleavened  bread  and  bitter  herbs,  leaving  nothing  till  the  next 
day,  and  not  breaking  a  bone  (Ex.  xii.  8,  10,  46) — are  repeated 

selves  as  much  as  possible  to  the  quantity  actually  needed,  and  one  whole  sheep 
of  a  year  old  would  furnish  flesh  enough  for  one  supper  for  fifteen  males  and 
fifteen  females.  (2)  The  slaughtering  of  all  these  lambs  need  not  have  taken 
place  in  the  narrow  space  afforded  by  the  court,  even  if  it  was  afterwards  per- 
formed in  the  more  roomy  courts  of  the  later  temple,  as  has  been  inferred  from 
2  Chron.  xxx.  IG  and  xxxv.  11.  Lastly,  the  sprinkling  of  the  blootl  was  no 
doubt  the  business  of  the  priests.  But  the  Levites  assisted  them,  so  that  they 
sprinkled  the  blood  upon  the  altar  "  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Levites"  (2  Chron. 
xxx.  16).  Moreover,  wo  are  by  no  means  in  a  condition  to  pronounce  posi- 
tively whether  three  priests  were  sufficient  or  not  at  Sinai,  because  we  have  no 
precise  information  respecting  the  course  pursued.  The  altar,  no  doubt,  would 
appear  too  small  for  the  performance  of  the  whole  within  the  short  time  of 
liardly  three  hours  (from  the  ninth  hour  of  the  day  to  the  eleventh).  But  if  it 
was  possible,  in  the  time  of  the  Emperor  Nero,  to  sprinkle  the  blood  of  250,500 
paschal  lambs  (for  that  number  was  actually  counted  under  Cestius;  see  Josephus^ 
I.  c.)  upon  the  altar  of  the  temple  of  that  time,  which  was  six,  or  eight,  or  even 
ten  times  larger,  it  must  have  been  also  possible,  in  Moses'  time,  for  the  blood 
of  50,000  lambs  to  be  sprinkled  upon  the  altar  of  the  tabernacle,  which  was 
five  cubits  in  length,  and  the  same  in  breadth. 

^  The  'rip'rn  is  marked  as  suspicious  by  puncta  extraordinaria^  probably  first 
of  all  simply  on  the  ground  that  the  more  exact  definition  is  not  found  in 
ver.  13.  The  Rabbins  suppose  the  mai*ks  to  indicate  that  rechokah  is  not  to  be. 
taken  here  in  its  literal  sense,  but  denotes  merely  distance  from  Jerusalem,  or 
from  the  threshold  of  the  outer  court  of  the  temple.  See  Mishuah  Pesach 
ix.  2,  with  the  commentaries  of  Bartenora  and  Maiinonides^  and  tlie  conjectures 
of  the  Pesikta  on  the  ten  passages  in  the  Pentateuch  with  punclis  extraordi*- 
nariis,  in  Drusii  nota  uheriores  ad  h.  v. 


52  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

here.  But  lest  any  one  should  pervert  this  permission,  to  celebrate 
the  Passover  a  month  later  in  case  of  insuperable  difficulties,  which 
had  only  been  given  for  the  purpose  of  enforcing  the  obligation  to 
keep  the  covenant  meal  upon  every  member  of  the  nation,  into  an 
excuse  for  postponing  it  without  any  necessity  and  merely  from 
indifference,  on  the  ground  that  he  could  make  it  up  afterwards, 
the  threat  is  held  out  in  ver.  13,  that  whoever  should  omit  to  keep 
the  feast  at  the  legal  time,  if  he  was  neither  unclean  nor  upon  a 
journey,  should  be  cut  off ;  and  in  ver.  14  the  command  is  repeated 
with  reference  to  foreigners,  that  they  were  also  to  keep  the  law 
and  ordinance  with  the  greatest  minuteness  when  they  observed 
the  Passover :  cf.  Ex.  xii.  48,  49,  according  to  which  the  stranger 
was  required  first  of  all  to  let  himself  be  circumcised.  In  ver. 
Ub,  n\T  stands  for  n>nri,  as  in  Ex.  xii.  49 ;  cf.  Ewald,  §  295,  d. 
1  .  .  .  "!  6^  .  .  .  «^,  both  .  .  .  and. 

SIGNS  AND  SIGNALS  FOE  THE  MARCH. CHAP.  IX.  15-X.  10. 

With  the  mustering  of  the  people  and  the  internal  organization 
of  the  congregation,  the  preparations  for  the  march  from  the  desert 
of  Sinai  to  the  promised  land  of  Canaan  were  completed ;  and  when 
the  feast  of  the  Passover  was  ended,  the  time  for  leaving  Sinai  had 
arrived.  Nothing  now  remained  to  be  noticed  except  the  required 
instructions  respecting  the  guidance  of  the  people  in  their  journey 
through  the  wilderness,  to  which  the  account  of  the  actual  departure 
and  march  is  appended.  The  account  before  us  describes  first  of 
all  the  manner  in  which  God  Himself  conducted  the  march  (chap. 
ix.  15-23)  ;  and  secondly,  instructions  are  given  respecting  the 
signals  to  be  used  for  regulating  the  order  of  the  march  (chap.  x. 
1-10). 

Chap.  ix.  15-23.  Signs  for  removing  and  encaimping. — On 
their  way  through  the  desert  from  the  border  of  Egypt  to  Sinai, 
Jehovah  Himself  had  undertaken  to  guide  His  people  by  a  cloud, 
as  the  visible  sign  and  vehicle  of  His  gracious  presence  (Ex.  xiii. 
21,  22).  This  cloud  had  come  down  upon  the  dwelling  when  the 
tabernacle  was  erected,  whilst  the  glory  of  the  Lord  filled  the  holy 
of  holies  (Ex.  xl.  34-38).  In  ver.  15  the  historian  refers  to  this 
fact,  and  then  describes  more  fully  what  had  been  already  briefly 
alluded  to  in  Ex.  xl.  36,  37,  namely,  that  when  the  cloud  rose  up 
from  the  dwelling  of  the  tabernacle  it  was  a  sign  for  removing,  and 


1 


CHAP.  IX.  15-23,  53 

when  it  came  down  upon  the  dwelling,  a  sign  for  encamping.  In 
ver.  15a,  ''on  the  day  of  the  setting  up  of  the  dwelling ^^  Ex.  xl. 
34,  35,  is  resumed ;  and  in  ver.  Ibh  the  appearance  of  the  cloud 
during  the  night,  from  evening  till  morning,  is  described  in  accord- 
ance with  Ex.  xl.  38.  (On  the  fact  itself,  see  the  exposition  of  Ex. 
xiii.  21,  22,)  myn  hr\\6^  \3m^  "  the  dwelling  of  the  tent  of  witness  " 
(^  used  for  the  genitive  to  avoid  a  double  construct  state :  Ewald,  § 
292,  a).  In  the  place  of  ohel  moed,  "  tent  of  the  meeting  of  Jehovah 
with  His  people,"  we  have  here  "  tent  of  witness  "  (or  "  testimony"), 
i.e.  of  the  tables  with  the  decalogue  which  were  laid  up  in  the  ark 
of  the  covenant  (Ex.  xxv.  16),  because  the  decalogue  formed  the 
basis  of  the  covenant  of  Jehovah  with  Israel,  and  the  pledge  of  the 
gracious  presence  of  the  Lord  in  the  tabernacle.  In  the  place  of 
"  dwellings  of  the  tent  of  witness,"  we  have  "  dwelling  of  witness  " 
(testimony)  in  chap.  x.  11,  and  "  tent  of  witness"  in  chap,  xviii.  2, 
xvii.  22,  to  denote  the  whole  dwelling,  as  divided  into  the  holy  place 
and  the  holy  of  holies,  and  not  the  holy  of  holies  alone.  This  is 
unmistakeably  evident  from  a  comparison  of  the  verse  before  us 
with  Ex.  xl.  34,  according  to  which  the  cloud  covered  not  merely 
one  portion  of  the  tabernacle,  but  the  whole  of  the  tent  of  meeting 
(ohel  moed).  The  rendering,  "  the  cloud  covered  the  dwelling  at 
the  tent  of  witness,"  i.e.  at  that  part  of  it  in  which  the  witness  (or 
"  testimony")  was  kept,  viz.  the  holy  of  holies,  which  Rosenmilller 
and  Knohel  adopt,  cannot  be  sustained,  inasmuch  as  ^  has  no  such 
meaning,  but  simply  conveys  the  idea  of  motion  and  passage  into  a 
place  or  condition  (cf.  Ewald,  §  217,  (/)  ;  and  the  dwelling  or  taber- 
nacle was  not  first  made  into  the  tent  of  witness  through  the  cloud 
which  covered  it. — Ver.  16.  The  covering  of  the  dwelling,  with  the 
cloud  which  shone  by  night  as  a  fiery  look,  was  constant,  and  not 
merely  a  phenomenon  which  appeared  when  the  tabernacle  was 
first  erected,  and  then  vanished  away  again. — Ver.  17.  ''  In  accord- 
ance with  the  rising  of  the  cloud  from  the  tentf  then  afterwards  the 
children  of  Israel  broke  up"  i.e.  whenever  the  cloud  ascended  up 
from  the  tent,  they  always  broke  up  immediately  afterwards  ;  "  and 
at  the  place  ichere  the  cloud  came  down,  there  they  encamped."  The 
P^,  or  settling  down  of  the  cloud,  sc.  upon  the  tabernacle,  we  can 
only  understand  in  the  following  manner,  as  the  tabernacle  was 
all  taken  to  pieces  during  the  march :  viz.  that  the  cloud  visibly 
descended  from  the  height  at  which  it  ordinarily  soared  above  the 
ark  of  the  covenant,  as  it  was  carried  in  front  of  the  army,  for  a 
signal  that  the  tabernacle  was  to  be  set  up  there ;  and  when  this 


54  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

had  been  done,  it  settled  down  upon  it. — Ver.  18.  As  Jehovali  was 
with  His  people  in  the  cloud,  the  rising  and  falling  of  the  cloud 
was  "  the  command  of  the  Lord"  to  the  Israelites  to  break  up  or 
to  pitch  the  camp.  As  long,  therefore,  as  the  cloud  rested  upon 
the  dwelling,  i.e.  remained  stationary,  they  continued  their  encamp- 
ment.— Vers.  19  sqq.  Whether  it  might  rest  many  days  long  ('^''"}5<ii, 
to  lengthen  out  the  resting),  or  only  a  few  days  (Gen.  xxxiv.  30), 
or  only  from  evening  till  morning,  and  then  rise  up  again  in  the 
morning,  or  for  a  day  and  a  night,  or  for  two  days,  or  for  a  month, 
or  for  days  (yamim),  i.e.  a  space  of  time  not  precisely  determined 
(of.  Gen.  iv.  3,  xl.  4),  they  encamped  without  departing.  "iTe/^^  fll 
the  charge  of  the  Lord^'  (vers.  19  and  23),  i.e.  observed  what  was 
to  be  observed  towards  Jehovah  (see  Lev.  viii.  35).  With  *^*^"^5  ^}, 
"  was  it  that,"  or  "  did  it  happen  that,"  two  other  possible  cases  are 
introduced.  After  ver.  20a,  the  apodosis,  "  they  kept  the  charge  of 
the  Lo7'd"  is  to  be  repeated  in  thought  from  ver.  19.  The  elabora- 
tion of  the  account  (vers.  15-23),  which  abounds  with  repetitions, 
is  intended  to  bring  out  the  importance  of  the  fact,  and  to  awaken 
the  consciousness  not  only  of  the  absolute  dependence  of  Israel 
upon  the  guidance  of  Jehovah,  but  also  of  the  gracious  care  of 
their  God,  which  was  thereby  displayed  to  the  Israelites  throughout 
all  their  journeyings. 


41 


II 


II 


Chap.  X.  1-10.  The  Silver  Sigxal-Tkumpets. — Although 
God  Himself  appointed  the  time  for  removal  and  encampment  by 
the  movement  of  the  cloud  of  His  presence,  signals  were  also  requi- 
site for  ordering  and  conducting  the  march  of  so  numerous  a  body, 
by  means  of  which  Moses,  as  commander-in-chief,  might  make 
known  his  commands  to  the  different  divisions  of  the  camp.     To 
this  end  God  directed  him  to  prepare  two  silver  trumpets  of  beaten 
work  (mikshah,   see  Ex.   xxv.   18),  which  should  serve   "  for  the 
calling  of  the  assembly,  and  for  the  breaking  up  of  the  camps/* 
i.e.  which  were  to  be  used  for  this  purpose.     The  form  of  these 
trumpets  is  not  further  described.     No  doubt  they  were  straight, 
not  curved,  as  we  may  infer  both  from  the  representation  of  these    _. 
trumpets  on  the  triumphal  arch  of  Titus  at  Rome,  and  also  from  Bl 
the  fact,  that  none  but  straight  trumpets  occur  on  the  old  Egyptian 
monuments  (see  my  Arch.  ii.  p.  187).     With  regard  to  the  use  of    —- 
them  for  calling  the  congregation,  the  following  directions  are  given  f  | 
in  vers.  3,  4  :  ''When  they  shall  blow  icith  them  (i.e.  with  both),  the     '  ' 
whole  congregation  (in  all  its  representatives)  shall  assemble  at  the 


CHAP.  X.  1-10.  55 

door  of  the  tabernacle ;  if  they  blow  with  only  one,  the  pnnces  or  heads 
of  the  families  of  Israel  shall  assemble  together.'' — Vers.  5,  6.  To 
give  the  signal  for  breaking  up  the  camp,  they  were  to  blow  nynri^ 
i.e.  a  noise  or  alarm.  At  the  first  blast  the  tribes  on  the  east,  i.e. 
those  who  were  encamped  in  the  front  of  the  tabernacle,  were  to 
break  up  ;  at  the  second,  those  who  were  encamped  on  the  south  ; 
and  so  on  in  the  order  prescribed  in  chap,  ii.,  though  this  is  not 
expressly  mentioned  here.  The  alarm  was  to  be  blown  un'^VBob^ 
with  regard  to  their  breaking  up  or  marching. — Ver.  7.  But  to  call 
the  congregation  together  they  were  to  bloiv,  not  to  sound  an  alarm. 
i^pri  signifies  blowing  in  short,  sharp  tones.  V^");}  —  n^jpn  V\^r\,  blow- 
ing in  a  continued  peal. — Vers.  8-10.  These  trumpets  were  to  be 
used  for  the  holy  purposes  of  the  congregation  generally,  and  there- 
fore not  only  the  making,  but  the  manner  of  using  them  was  pre- 
scribed by  God  Himself.  They  were  to  be  blown  by  the  priests 
alone,  and  "  to  be  for  an  eternal  ordinance  to  the  families  of  Israel,'' 
i.e.  to  be  preserved  and  used  by  them  in  all  future  times,  according 
to  the  appointment  of  God.  The  blast  of  these  trumpets  was  to 
call  Israel  to  remembrance  before  Jehovah  in  time  of  war  and  on 
their  feast-days. — Ver.  9.  "  If  y^  90  to  war  in  your  land  against  the 
enemy  who  oppresses  you,  and  ye  blow  the  trumpets,  ye  shall  bring 
yourselves  to  remembrance  before  Jehovah,  and  shall  be  saved  (by 
Him)  from  your  enemies."  "^^C  ■  ^^^)  *^  come  into  war,  or  go  to 
war,  is  to  be  distinguished  from  HDnptpp  6512,  to  make  ready  for 
war,  go  out  to  battle  (chap.  xxxi.  21,  xxxii.  6). — Ver.  10.  "  And 
on  your  joyous  day,  and  your  feasts  and  new  moons,  ye  shall  blow 
the  trumpets  over  your  burnt-offerings  and  peace-offerings,  that  they 
may  be  to  you  for  a  memorial  (remembrance)  before  your  God." — 
nnrpE^n  Di""  is  any  day  on  which  a  practical  expression  was  given 
to  their  joy,  in  the  form  of  a  sacrifice.  The  Q''1VJD  are  the  feasts 
enumerated  in  chaps,  xxviii.  and  xxix.  and  Lev.  xxiii.  The  "  be- 
ginnings of  the  months,"  or  new-moon  days,  were  not,  strictly 
speaking,  feast-days,  with  the  exception  of  the  seventh  new  moon 
of  the  year  (see  at  chap,  xxviii.  11).  On  the  object,  viz.  ''for  a 
memorial"  see  Ex.  xxviii.  29,  and  the  explanation,  vol.  ii.  p.  199. 
In  accordance  with  this  divine  appointment,  so  full  of  promise,  we 
find  that  in  after  times  the  trumpets  were  blown  by  the  priests  in 
war  (chap.  xxxi.  6  ;  2  Ghron.  xiii.  12,  14,  xx.  21,  22,  28)  as  well 
as  on  joyful  occasions,  such  as  at  the  removal  of  the  ark  (1  Chron. 
XV.  24,  xvi.  6),  at  the  consecration  of  Solomon's  temple  (2  Chron. 
V.  12,  vii.  6),  the  laying  of  the  foundation  of  the  second  temple 


56  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

(Ezra  iii.  10),  the  consecration  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xii. 
35,  41),  and  other  festivities  (2  Chron.  xxix.  27). 


II.— JOURNEY  FROM  SINAI  TO  THE  STEPPES  OF  MOAB. 
Chap.  x.  11-xxi. 

The  straight  and  shortest  way  from  Sinai  to  Kadesh,  on  the  southern 
border  of  Canaan,  was  only  a  journey  of  eleven  days  (Deut.  i.  2). 
By  this  road  God  led  His  people,  whom  He  had  received  into  the 
covenant  of  His  grace  at  Sinai,  and  placed  under  the  discipline  of  m\ 
the  law,  to  the  ultimate  object  of  their  journey  through  the  desert ; 
so  that,  a  few  months  after  leaving  Horeb  or  Sinai,  the  Israelites 
had  already  arrived  at  Kadesh,  in  the  desert  of  Zin,  on  the  southern  1 
border  of  the  promised  land,  and  were  able  to  send  out  men  as 
spies,  to  survey  the  inheritance  of  which  they  were  to  take  pos-  ^ 
session.     The  way  from  Sinai  to  the  desert  of  Zin  forms  the  Jirst  ll 
stage  in  the  history  of  the  guidance  of  Israel  through  the  wilder- 
ness to  Canaan. 


FROM  SINAI  TO  KADESH. — CHAP.  X.  11-XIV.  45. 

Removal  of  the  Camp  from  the  Desert  of  Sinai, — Chap.  x.  11-36 

Vers.  11,  12.  After  all  the  preparations  were  completed  for  the 
journey  of  the  Israelites  from  Sinai  to  Canaan,  on  the  20th  day  of 
the  second  month,  in  the  second  year,  the  cloud  rose  up  from  the 
tent  of  witness,  and  the  children  of  Israel  broke  up  out  of  the  desert 
of  Sinai,  Dn"'VDpp,  **  according  to  their  journeys"  (lit.  breakings  up  ; 
see  at  Gen.  xiii.  3  and  Ex.  37),  Le.  in  the  order  prescribed  in 
chap.  ii.  9, 16,  24,  31,  and  described  in  vers.  14  sqq.  of  this  chapter. 
"  And  the  cloud  rested  in  the  desert  of  Parang  In  these  words,  the 
whole  journey  from  the  desert  of  Sinai  to  the  desert  of  Paran  is 
given  summarily,  or  as  a  heading ;  and  the  more  minute  description 
follows  from  ver.  14  to  chap.  xii.  16.  The  ^'desert  of  Paran"  was 
not  the  first  station,  but  the  third  ;  and  the  Israelites  did  not  arrive 
at  it  till  after  they  had  left  Hazeroth  (chap.  xii.  16).  The  desert  of 
Sinai  is  mentioned  as  the  starting-point  of  the  journey  through  the 
desert,  in  contrast  with  the  desert  of  Paran,  in  the  neighbourhood 


I 


CHAP  X.  11,  12.  57 

of  Kadesh,  whence  the  spies  were  sent  out  to  Canaan  (chap.  xiii. 
2,  21),  the  goal  and  termination  of  their  journey  through  the 
desert.  That  the  words,  "  the  cloud  rested  in  the  desert  .of  Paran" 
(ver.  12&),  contain  a  preliminary  statement  (like  Gen.  xxvii.  23, 
xxxvii.  5,  as  compared  with  ver.  8,  and  1  Kings  vi.  9  as  compared 
with  ver.  14,  etc.),  is  unmistakeably  apparent,  from  the  fact  that 
Moses'  negotiations  with  Hobab,  respecting  his  accompanying  the 
Israelites  to  Canaan,  as  a  guide  who  knew  the  road,  are  noticed 
for  the  first  time  in  vers.  29  sqq.,  although  they  took  place  before 
the  departure  from  Sinai,  and  that  after  this  the  account  of  the 
breaking-up  is  resumed  in  ver.  33,  and  the  journey  itself  described. 
Hence,  although  Kurtz  (iii.  220)  rejects  this  explanation  of  ver. 
126  as  "  forced,"  and  regards  the  desert  of  Paran  as  a  place  of  en- 
campment between  Tabeerah  and  Kibroth-hattaavah,  even  he  can- 
not help  identifying  the  breakiug-up  described  in  ver.  33  with  that 
mentioned  in  ver.  12  ;  that  is  to  say,  regarding  ver.  12  as  a  sum- 
mary of  the  events  which  are  afterwards  more  fully  described. 

The  desert  of  Paran  is  the  large  desert  plateau  which  is  bounded 
on  the  east  by  the  Arabah,  the  deep  valley  running  from  the 
southern  point  of  the  Dead  Sea  to  the  Elanitic  Gulf,  and  stretches 
westwards  to  the  desert  of  Shur  {Jifar ;  see  Gen.  xvi.  7  ;  Ex.  xv. 
22),  that  separates  Egypt  from  Philistia :  it  reaches  southwards  to 
Jebel  et  Tih,  the  foremost  spur  of  the  Horeb  mountains,  and  north- 
wards to  the  mountains  of  the  Amorites,  the  southern  border  of 
Canaan.  The  origin  and  etymology  of  the  name  are  obscure.  The 
opinion  that  it  was  derived  from  "IVQ,  to  open  wide,  and  originally 
denoted  the  broad  valley  of  Wady  Murreh,  between  the  Hebrew 
Negeb  and  the  desert  of  Tih,  and  was  then  transferred  to  the 
whole  district,  has  very  little  probability  in  it  {Knohel).  All  that 
can  be  regarded  as  certain  is,  that  the  El-Paran  of  Gen.  xiv.  6  is 
a  proof  that  in  the  very  earliest  times  the  name  was  applied  to  the 
whole  of  the  desert  of  Tih  down  to  the  Elanitic  Gulf,  and  that  the 
Paran  of  the  Bible  had  no  historical  connection  either  with  the 
KdifiTj  ^apav  and  tribe  of  ^apavlraL  mentioned  hy  PtoL  (v.  17,  i.  3), 
or  with  the  town  of  ^apdv,  of  which  the  remains  are  still  to  be 
seen  in  the  Wady  Feiran  at  Serbal,  or  with  the  tower  of  Faran 
Ahrun  of  Fdrisi,  the  modern  Hammdn  Faraun,  on  the  Eed  Sea,  to 
the  south  of  the  Wady  Gharandel.  By  the  Arabian  geographers, 
Isztachri,  Kazwini,  and  others,  and  also  by  the  Bedouins,  it  is  called 
et  Tih,  i.e.  the  wandering  of  the  children  of  Israel,  as  being  the 
ground  upon  which  the  children  of  Israel  wandered  about  in  the 


58  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

wilderness  for  forty  years  (or  more  accurately,  thirty-eight).  This 
desert  plateau,  which  is  thirty  German  miles  (150  English)  long 
from  south  to  north,  and  almost  as  broad,  consists,  according  to 
Arabian  geographers,  partly  of  sand  and  partly  of  firm  soil,  and  is 
intersected  through  almost  its  entire  length  by  the  Wadf/  el  Arish, 
which  commences  at  a  short  distance  from  the  northern  extremity 
of  the  southern  border  mountains  of  et  Till,  and  runs  in  nearly  a 
straight  line  from  south  to  north,  only  turning  in  a  north-westerly 
direction  towards  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  on  the  north-east  of  the 
Jehel  el  Helal.  This  wady  divides  the  desert  of  Paran  into  a 
western  and  an  eastern  half.  The  western  half  lies  lower  than  the 
eastern,  and  slopes  off  gradually,  without  any  perceptible  natural 
boundary,  into  the  flat  desert  of  Shur  {Jifav),  on  the  shore  of  the 
Mediterranean  Sea.  The  eastern  half  (between  the  Arabah  and 
the  Wady  el  Arish)  consists  throughout  of  a  lofty  mountainous 
country,  intersected  by  larger  and  smaller  wadys,  and  with  extensive 
table-land  between  the  loftier  ranges,  which  slopes  off  somewhat  in 
a  northerly  direction,  its  southern  edge  being  formed  by  the  eastern 
spurs  of  the  Jebel  et  Tih.  It  is  intersected  by  the  Wady  el 
Jerafeh,  which  commences  at  the  foot  of  the  northern  slope  of  the 
mountains  of  Tih,  and  after  proceeding  at  first  in  a  northerly 
direction,  turns  higher  up  in  a  north-easterly  direction  towards  the 
Arabah,  but  rises  in  its  northern  portion  to  a  strong  mountain 
fortress,  which  is  called,  from  its  present  inhabitants,  the  highlands 
of  the  Azazimeh,  and  is  bounded  on  both  south  and  north  by  steep 
and  lofty  mountain  ranges.  The  southern  boundary  is  formed  by  the 
range  which  connects  the  Araif  en  Nahha  with  the  Jehel  el  Mukrah 
on  the  east ;  the  northern  boundary,  by  the  mountain  barrier  which 
stretches  along  the  Wady  Murreh  from  west  to  east,  and  rises  preci- 
pitously from  it,  and  of  which  the  following  description  has  been 
given  by  Rowland  and  Williams^  the  first  of  modern  travellers  to 
visit  this  district,  who  entered  the  terra  incognita  by  proceeding 
directly  south  from  Hebron,  past  Arara  or  Aroer,  and  surveyed  it 
from  the  border  of  the  Rachmah  plateau,  i.e.  of  the  mountains  of 
the  Amorites  (Dent.  i.  7,  20,  44),  or  the  southernmost  plateau  of 
the  mountains  of  Judah  (see  at  chap.  xiv.  45)  : — "  A  gigantic 
mountain  towered  above  us  in  savage  grandeur,  with  masses  of 
naked  rock,  resembling  the  bastions  of  some  Cyclopean  architec- 
ture, the  end  of  which  it  was  impossible  for  the  eye  to  reach,  towards 
either  the  west  or  the  east.  It  extended  also  a  long  way  towards 
the  south ;  and  with  its  rugged,  broken,  and  dazzling  masses  of 


II 


II 


I 


CHAP.  X.  13-28.  59 

clialk,  which  reflected  the  burning  rays  of  the  sun,  it  looked  like 
an  unapproachable  furnace,  a  most  fearful  desert,  without  the 
slightest  trace  of  vegetation.  A  broad  defile,  called  Wady  Murreh, 
ran  at  the  foot  of  this  bulwark,  towards  the  east ;  and  after  a  course 
of  several  miles,  on  reaching  the  strangely  formed  mountain  of 
Moddera  (Madurah),  it  is  divided  into  two  parts,  the  southern 
branch  still  retaining  the  same  name,  and  running  eastwards  to  the 
Arabah,  whilst  the  other  was  called  Wady  Fikreh,  and  ran  in  a  north- 
easterly direction  to  the  Dead  Sea.  This  mountain  barrier  proved 
to  us  beyond  a  doubt  that  we  were  now  standing  on  the  southern 
boundary  of  the  promised  land;  and  we  were  confirmed  in  this 
opinion  by  the  statement  of  the  guide,  that  Kadesh  was  only  a  few 
hours  distant  from  the  point  where  we  were  standing"  (Ritler,  xiv. 
p.  1084).  The  place  of  encampment  in  the  desert  of  Paran  is  to 
be  souglit  for  at  the  north-west  corner  of  this  lofty  mountain  range 
(see  at  chap.  xii.  16). 

In  vers.  13-28  the  removal  of  the  different  camps  is  more  fully 
described,  according  to  the  order  of  march  established  in  chap,  ii., 
the  order  in  which  the  different  sections  of  the  Levites  drew  out 
and  marched  being  particularly  described  in  this  place  alone  (cf. 
vers.  17  and  21  with  chap.  ii.  17).  First  of  all  (lit.  ''at  the  hegin- 
ning^^)  the  banner  of  Judah  drew  out,  with  Issachar  and  Zebulun 
(vers.  14-16 ;  cf.  chap.  ii.  3—9).  The  tabernacle  was  then  taken 
down,  and  the  Gershonites  and  Merarites  broke  up,  carrying  those 
portions  of  it  which  were  assigned  to  them  (ver.  17 ;  cf.  chap, 
iv.  24  sqq.,  and  31  sqq.),  that  they  might  set  up  the  dwelling 
at  the  place  to  be  chosen  for  the  next  encampment,  before  the 
Kohathites  arrived  with  the  sacred  things  (ver.  21).  The  banner 
of  Eeuben  followed  next  with  Simeon  and  Gad  (vers.  18—21;  cf. 
chap.  ii.  10-16),  and  the  Kohathites  joined  them  bearing  the  sacred 
things  (ver.  21).  K^p?3n  (=  c^npn,  chap.  vii.  9,  and  ri'^p']Py!  ^p, 
chap.  iv.  4)  signifies  the  sacred  things  mentioned  in  chap.  iii.  31. 
In  ver.  216  the  subject  is  the  Gershonites  and  Merarites,  who  had 
broken  up  before  with  the  component  parts  of  the  dwelling,  and  set 
up  the  dwelling,  DN3"nv,  against  their  (the  Kohathites')  arrival,  so 
that  they  might  place  the  holy  things  at  once  within  it. — Vers. 
22-28.  Behind  the  sacred  things  came  the  banners  of  Ephraim, 
with  Manasseh  and  Benjamin  (see  chap.  ii.  18-24),  and  Dan  with 
Asher  and  Naphtali  (chap.  ii.  25-31) ;  so  that  the  camp  of  Dan 
was  the  "  collector  of  all  the  camps  according  to  their  hosts^'  i.e. 
formed  that  division  of  the  army  which  kept  the  hosts  together. 


60  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Vers.  29-32.  The  conversation  in  which  Moses  persuaded  Hohah 
the  Midianite,  the  son  of  Reguel  (see  at  Ex.  ii.  16),  and  his  brother- 
in-law,  to  go  with  the  Israelites,  and  being  well  acquainted  with  the 
desert  to  act  as  their  leader,  preceded  the  departure  in  order  of 
time  ;  but  it  is  placed  between  the  setting  out  and  the  march  itself, 
as  being  subordinate  to  the  main  events.  When  and  why  Hobab 
came  into  the  camp  of  the  Israelites, — whether  he  came  with  his 
father  Reguel  (or  Jethro)  when  Israel  first  arrived  at  Horeb,  and 
so  remained  behind  when  Jethro  left  (Ex.  xviii.  27),  or  whether  he 
did  not  come  till  afterwards, — was  left  uncertain,  because  it  was  a 
matter  of  no  consequence  in  relation  to  what  is  narrated  here.^ 
The  request  addressed  to  Hobab,  that  he  would  go  with  them  to 
tlie  place  which  Jehovah  had  promised  to  give  them,  i.e,  to  Canaan, 
was  supported  by  the  promise  that  he  would  do  good  to  them 
(Hobab  and  his  company),  as  Jehovah  had  spoken  good  concern- 
ing Israel,  Le»  had  promised  it  prosperity  in  Canaan.  And  when 
Hobab  declined  the  request,  and  said  that  he  should  return  into 
his  own  land,  i.e.  to  Midian  at  the  south-east  of  Sinai  (see  at  Ex. 
ii.  15  and  iii.  1),  and  to  his  kindred,  Moses  repeated  the  request, 
'^  Leave  us  not,  forasmuch  as  thou  knowest  our  encamping  in  the 
desert,^'  i.e.  knowest  wdiere  we  can  pitch  our  tents ;  "  therefore  be 
to  v^  as  eyes,^^  i.e.  be  our  leader  and  guide, — and  promised  at  the 
same  time  to  do  him  the  good  that  Jehovah  would  do  to  them. 
Although  Jehovah  led  the  march  of  the  Israelites  in  the  pillar  of 
cloud,  not  only  giving  the  sign  for  them  to  break  up  and  to  encamp, 
but  showing  generally  the  direction  they  were  to  take ;  yet  Hobab, 
who  was  well  acquainted  with  the  desert,  would  be  able  to  render 
very  important  service  to  the  Israelites,  if  he  only  pointed  out,  in 
those  places  where  the  sign  to  encamp  was  given  by  the  cloud,  the 

.  ^  The  grounds  upon  -which  Knohel  affirms  that  the  "Elohist"  is  not  the 
author  of  the  account  in  vers.  29-36,  and  pronounces  it  a  Jehovistic  interpola- 
tion, are  perfectly  futile.  The  assertion  that  the  Elohist  had  already  given  a 
full  description  of  the  departure  in  vers.  11-28,  rests  upon  an  oversight  of  the 
peculiarities  of  the  Semitic  historians.  The  expression  "  they  set  forward"  in 
ver.  28  is  an  anticipatory  remark,  as  Knohel  himself  admits  in  other  places  {e.g. 
Gen.  vii.  12,  viii.  3  ;  Ex.  vii.  6,  xii.  60,  xvi.  34).  The  other  argument,  that 
Moses'  brother-in-law  is  not  mentioned  anywhere  else,  involves  a  petitio  prin- 
cipii,  and  is  just  as  powerless  a  proof,  as  such  peculiarities  of  style  as  "  mount 
of  the  Lord,"  *'  ark  of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord,"  ^i^NT  to  do  good  (ver.  29),  and 
others  of  a  similar  kind,  of  which  the  critics  have  not  even  attempted  to  prove 
that  tliey  are  at  variance  with  the  style  of  the  Elohist,  to  say  nothing  of  their 
having  actually  done  so. 


I 


CHAP.  X.  33-36.  61 

springs,  oases,  and  plots  of  pasture  which  are  often  buried  quite  out 
of  sight  in  the  mountains  and  valleys  that  overspread  the  desert. 
What  Hobab  ultimately  decided  to  do,  we  are  not  told ;  but  "  as  no 
further  refusal  is  mentioned,  and  the  departure  of  Israel  is  related 
immediately  afterwards,  he  probably  consented"  (Knohel).  This 
is  raised  to  a  certainty  by  the  fact  that,  at  the  commencement  of 
the  period  of  the  Judges,  the  sons  of  the  brother-in-law  of  Moses 
went  into  the  desert  of  Judah  to  the  south  of  Arad  along  with  the 
sons  of  Judah  (Judg.  i.  16),  and  therefore  had  entered  Canaan 
with  the  Israelites,  and  that  they  were  still  living  in  that  neigh- 
bourhood in  the  time  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xv.  6,  xxvii.  10,  xxx.  29). 

Vers.  33-36.  ''And  they  (the  Israelites)  departed  from  the  mount 
of  Jehovah  (Ex.  iii.  1)  three  days'  journey ;  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of 
Jehovah  going  before  them,  to  search  out  a  resting-place  for  them.  And 
the  cloud  of  Jehovah  was  over  them  by  day,  when  they  broke  up  from 
the  camp.^^  Jehovah  still  did  as  He  had  already  done  on  the  way 
to  Sinai  (Ex.  xiii.  21,  22) :  He  went  before  them  in  the  pillar  of 
cloud,  according  to  His  promise  (Ex.  xxxiii.  13),  on  their  journey 
from  Sinai  to  Canaan  ;  with  this  simple  difference,  however,  that 
henceforth  the  cloud  that  embodied  the  presence  of  Jehovah  was 
connected  with  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  as  the  visible  throne  of  His 
gracious  presence  which  had  been  appointed  by  Jehovah  Himself. 
To  this  end  the  ark  of  the  covenant  was  carried  separately  from 
the  rest  of  the  sacred  things,  in  front  of  the  whole  army ;  so  that 
the  cloud  which  went  before  them  floated  above  the  ark,  leading 
the  procession,  and  regulating  its  movements  and  the  direction  it 
took  in  such  a  manner  that  the  permanent  connection  between  the 
cloud  and  the  sanctuary  might  be  visibly  manifested  even  during 
their  march.  It  is  true  that,  in  the  order  observed  in  the  camp  and 
on  the  march,  no  mention  is  made  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  going 
in  front  of  the  whole  army  ;  but  this  omission  is  no  more  a  proof  of 
any  discrepancy  between  this  verse  and  chap.  ii.  17,  or  of  a  differ- 
ence of  authorship,  than  the  separation  of  the  different  divisions  of 
the  Levites  upon  the  march,  which  is  also  not  mentioned  in  chap, 
ii.  17,  although  the  Gershonites  and  Merarites  actually  marched 
between  the  banners  of  Judah  and  Reuben,  and  the  Kohathites 
with  the  holy  things  between  the  banners  of  Reuben  and  Ephraim 
(vers.  17  and  21).^  The  words,  "the  cloud  was  above  them"  (the 
Israelites),  and  so  forth,  can  be  reconciled  with  this  supposition 

1  As  the  critics  do  not  deny  that  vers.  11-28  are  written  by  the  "  Elohist" 
notwithstanding  this  difference,  they  have  no  right  to  bring  forward  the  account 


62  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

without  any  difficulty,  whether  we  understand  them  as  signifying 
that  the  cloud,  which  appeared  as  a  guiding  column  floating  above 
the  ark  and  moved  forward  along  with  it,  also  extended  itself  along       ^ 
the  whole  procession,  and  spread  out  as  a  protecting  shade  over  the  ll 
whole  army  (as   0.  v.   Gerlach  and  Bauingarten  suppose),  or  that    " 
"  above  them"  (upon  them)  is  to  be  regarded  as  expressive  of  the 
fact  that  it  accompanied  them  as  a  protection  and  shade.     Nor  isfll 
Ps.  cv.  39,  which  seems,  so  far  as  the  words  are  concerned,  rather  to 
favour  the  first  explanation,  really  at  variance  with  this  view;  for 
the  Psalmist's  intention  is  not  so  much  to  give  a  physical  description  I 
of  the  phenomenon,  as  to  describe  the  sheltering  protection  of  God      - 
in  poetical  words  as  a  spreading  out  of  the  cloud  above  the  wander-      ' 
ing  people  of  God,  in  the  form  of  a  protection  against  both  heat  and  ■I 
rain  (cf.  Isa.  iv.  5,  6).     Moreover,  vers.  336  and  34  have  a  poetical 
character,  answering  to  the  elevated  nature  of  their  subject,  and 
are  to  be  interpreted  as  follows  according  to  the  laws  of  a  poetical 
parallelism :  The  one  thought  that  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  with 
the  cloud  soaring  above  it,  led  the  way  and  sheltered  those  who 
were  marching,  is  divided  into  two  clauses ;  in  ver.  336  only  the 
ark  of  the  covenant  is  mentioned  as  going  in  front  of  the  Israelites, 
and  in  ver.  34  only  the  cloud  as  a  shelter  over  them  :  whereas 
the  carrying  of  the  ark  in  front  of  the  army  could  only  accomplish 
the  end  proposed,  viz.  to  search  out  a  resting-place  for  them,  by«l 
Jehovah  going  above  them  in  the  cloud,  and  showing  the  bearers 
of  the  ark  both  the  way  they  were  to  take,  and  the  place  where 
they  were  to  rest.     The  ark  with  the  tables  of  the  law  is  not  called 
"the  ark  of  testimony"  here,  according  to  its  contents,  as  in  Ex. 
XXV.  22,  xxvi.  33,  34,  xxx.  6,  etc.,  but  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of 
Jehovah,  according  to  its  design  and  signification  for  Israel,  which 
was  the  only  point,  or  at  any  rate  the  principal  point,  in  considera- 
tion here.     The  resting-place  which  the  ark  of  the  covenant  found 
at  the  end  of  three  days,  is  not  mentioned  in  ver.  34 ;  it  was  not 
Tabeerah,  however  (chap.  xi.  3),  but  Kibroth-hattaavah  (chap,  xi, 
34,  35  ;  cf.  chap,  xxxiii.  16). 

In  vers.  35  and  36,  the  w^ords  which  Moses  was  in  the  habit  oi 
uttering,  both  when  the  ark  removed  and  w^hen  it  came  to  rest 
again,  are  given  not  only  as  a  proof  of  the  joyous  confidence  of 
Moses,  but  as  an  encouragement  to  the  congregation  to  cherish  the 
same  believing  confidence.     When  breaking  up,  he  said,  "  Rise  up, 

of  the  ark  going  first  as  a  contradiction  to  chap,  ii.,  and  therefore  a  proof  thatj 
vers.  33  sqq.  are  not  of  Elohistic  origin. 


I 


CHAP.  X.  35,  36.  G3 

Jeliovali !  that  Thine  enemies  may  he  scattered,  and  they  that  hate 
Thee  may  flee  before  Thy  face;'  and  when  it  rested,  '^  Return, 
Jehovah,  to  the  ten  thousand  thousands  of  Israel!'^  Moses  could 
speak  in  this  way,  because  he  knew  that  Jehovah  and  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  were  inseparably  connected,  and  saw  in  the  ark  of  the 
covenant,  as  the  throne  of  Jehovah,  a  material  pledge  of  the  gra- 
cious presence  of  the  Almighty  God.  He  said  this,  however,  not 
merely  with  reference  to  enemies  who  might  encounter  the  Israel- 
ites in  the  desert,  but  with  a  confident  anticipation  of  the  calling 
of  Israel,  to  strive  for  the  cause  of  the  Lord  in  this  hostile  world, 
and  rear  His  kingdom  upon  earth.  Human  power  was  not  suffi- 
cient for  this ;  but  to  accomplish  this  end,  it  was  necessary  that  the 
Almighty  God  should  go  before  His  people,  and  scatter  their  foes. 
The  prayer  addressed  to  God  to  do  this,  is  an  expression  of  bold 
believing  confidence, — a  prayer  sure  of  its  answer ;  and  to  Israel  it 
was  the  word  with  which  the  congregation  of  God  was  to  carry  on 
the  conflict  at  all  times  against  the  powers  and  authorities  of  a 
whole  hostile  world.  It  is  in  this  sense  that  in  Ps.  Ixviii.  2,  the 
words  are  held  up  by  David  before  himself  and  his  generation  as  a 
banner  of  victory,  "  to  arm  the  Church  with  confidence,  and  fortify 
it  against  the  violent  attacks  of  its  foes"  (^Calvin),  ni^K^  is  construed 
with  an  accusative :  return  to  the  ten  thousands  of  the  hosts  of 
Israel,  i.e.  after  having  scattered  Thine  enemies,  turn  back  af^ain 
to  Thy  people  to  dwell  among  them.  The  "  thousands  of  Israel," 
as  in  chap.  i.  16.^ 

^  The  inverted  nuns^  C,  at  the  beginning  and  close  of  vers.  35,  36,  which 
are  found,  according  to  R.  MenacTierrCs  de  Lonzano  Or  Torah  (f.  17),  in  all  the 
Spanish  and  German  MSS.,  and  are  sanctioned  by  the  Masorah,  are  said  by  the 
Talmud  (tract  de  sahhatlio)  to  be  merely  signa  parentJieseos,  qux  monerent  prxter 
historix  seriem  versum  35  et  36  ad  capitis  Jinem  inseri  (cf.  Matt.  Hilleri  de 
Arcano  Ketldb  et  Keri  libri  diio^  pp.  158,  159).  The  Cabbalists,  on  the  other 
hand,  according  to  R.  Menach.  1.  c,  find  an  allusion  in  it  to  the  Shechinah, 
"  qux  velut  obversa  ad  tergum  facie  sequenfes  Israelitas  ex  impenso  amore  respi- 
cereV  (see  the  note  in  /.  H.  Michaelis'  Bibl.  Jiebr.).  In  other  MSS.,  however, 
which  are  supported  by  the  Masora  Erffart^  the  inverted  nun  is  found  in  the 
words  j;bC3  (ver.  35)  and  D"'jC&<nD3  Dj;n  ^'T'1  (chap.  xi.  1)  :  the  first,  ad  innu- 
endum  ut  sic  retrorsum  aganiur  omnes  hostes  Israelitarum ;  the  second,  ut  esset 
symbolum  perpetuum  perversitatis  populi,  inter  tot  illustria  signa  liberationis  et 
maximorum  benejiciorum  Dei  acerbe  quiritantiiim,  ad  dedarandam  ingratitudinem 
et  contumaciam  suam  (cf.  /.  Buxtorf  Tiberias^  p.  169). 


u 


64  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


OCCURRENCES  AT   TABEERAH  AND   KIBROTH-HATTAAVAH. — 

CJHAP.  XI. 

Vers.  1-3.  After  a  three  days'  march  the  Israelites  arrived  at  a 
resting-place  ;  but  the  people  began  at  once  to  be  discontented  with 
their  situation.^  The  people  were  like  those  who  complain  in  the  ears  of 
Jehovah  of  something  bad;  i.e.  they  behaved  like  persons  who  groan 
and  murmur  because  of  some  misfortune  that  has  happened  to  them. 
No  special  occasion  is  mentioned  for  the  complaint.  The  words  are 
expressive,  no  doubt,  of  the  general  dissatisfaction  and  discontent 
of  the  people  at  the  difficulties  and  privations  connected  with  the 
journey  through  the  wilderness,  to  which  they  gave  utterance  so 
loudly,  that  their  complaining  reached  the  ears  of  Jehovah.  At 
this  His  wrath  burned,  inasmuch  as  the  complaint  was  directed 
against  Him  and  His  guidance,  "  so  that  fire  of  Jehovah  burned 
against  them,  and  ate  at  the  end  of  the  camp.^^  3  lya  signifies  here, 
not  to  burn  a  person  (Job  i.  16),  but  to  burn  against.  "  Fire  of 
Jehovah :"  a  fire  sent  by  Jehovah,  but  not  proceeding  directly  from 
Him,  or  bursting  forth  from  the  cloud,  as  in  Lev.  x.  2.  Whether 
it  was  kindled  through  a  flash  of  lightning,  or  in  some  other  such 
way,  cannot  be  more  exactly  determined.  There  is  not  sufficient 
ground  for  the  supposition  that  the  fire  merely  seized  upon  the 
bushes  about  the  camp  and  the  tents  of  the  people,  but  not  upon 
human  beings  (Ros,,  Knobel),  All  that  is  plainly  taught  in  the 
words  is,  that  the  fire  did  not  extend  over  the  whole  camp,  but 
merely  broke  out  at  one  end  of  it,  and  sank  down  again,  i.e,  was 
extinguished  very  quickly,  at  the  intercession  of  Moses  ;  so  that  in 
this  judgment  the  Lord  merely  manifested  His  power  to  destroy 
the  murmurers,  that  He  might  infuse  into  the  whole  nation  a  whole- 
some dread  of  His  holy  majesty. — Yer.  3.  From  this  judgment  the 
place  where  the  fire  had  burned  received  the  name  of  "  Tabeerah^'' 
i.e,  burning,  or  place  of  burning.  Now,  as  this  spot  is  distinctly 
described  as  the  end  or  outermost  edge  of  the  camp,  this  "  place  M\ 

^  The  arguments  by  which  Knobel  undertakes  to  prove,  that  in  chaps,  xi. 
and  xii.  of  the  original  work  different  foreign  accounts  respecting  the  first 
encampments  after  leaving  Sinai  have  been  woven  together  by  the  "  Jehovist," 
are  founded  upon  misinterpretations  and  arbitrary  assumptions  and  conclusions, 
such  as  the  assertion  that  the  tabernacle  stood  outside  the  camp  (chaps,  xi.  25, 
xii.  5)  ;  that  Miriam  entered  the  tabernacle  (chap.  xii.  4,  5)  ;  that  the  original 
work  had  already  reported  the  arrival  of  Israel  in  Paran  in  chap.  x.  12  ;  and 
that  no  reference  is  ever  made  to  a  camping-place  called  Tabeerah,  and  others 
of  the  same  kind.     For  the  proof,  see  the  explanation  of  the  verses  referred  to. 


CHAP.  XI.  4-9.  65 

of  burning"  must  not  be  regarded,  as  it  is  by  Knohel  and  others,  as 
a  different  station  from  the  "  graves  of  lust."  Taheerah  was  simply 
the  local  name  given  to  a  distant  part  of  the  whole  camp,  which 
received  soon  after  the  name  of  Kibroth-ffattaavaJi,  on  account  of 
the  greater  judgment  which  the  people  brought  upon  themselves 
through  their  rebellion.  This  explains  not  only  the  omission  of  the 
name  Tabeerah  from  the  list  of  encampments  in  chap,  xxxiii.  16, 
but  also  the  circumstance,  that  nothing  is  said  about  any  removal 
from  Tabeerah  to  Kibroth-Hattaavah,  and  that  the  account  of  the 
murmuring  of  the  people,  because  of  the  want  of  those  supplies  of 
food  to  which  they  had  been  accustomed  in  Egypt,  is  attached, 
without  anything  further,  to  the  preceding  narrative.  There  is 
nothing  very  surprising  either,  in  the  fact  that  the  people  should 
have  given  utterance  to  their  wish  for  the  luxuries  of  Egypt,  which 
they  had  been  deprived  of  so  long,  immediately  after  this  judgment 
of  God,  if  we  only  understand  the  whole  affair  as  taking  place  in 
exact  accordance  with  the  words  of  the  texts,  viz.  that  the  unbe- 
lieving and  discontented  mass  did  not  discern  the  chastising  hand 
of  God  at  all  in  the  conflagration  which  broke  out  at  the  end  of  the 
camp,  because  it  was  not  declared  to  be  a  punishment  from  God, 
and  was  not  preceded  by  a  previous  announcement ;  and  therefore 
that  they  gave  utterance  in  loud  murmurings  to  the  discontent  of 
their  hearts  respecting  the  want  of  flesh,  without  any  regard  to  what 
had  just  befallen  them. 

Vers.  4-9.  The  first  impulse  to  this  came  from  the  mob  that 
had  come  out  of  Egypt  along  with  the  Israelites.  "  The  mixed 
multitude:'^  see  at  Ex.  xii.  38.  They  felt  and  expressed  a  longing 
for  the  better  food  which  they  had  enjoyed  in  Egypt,  and  which 
was  not  to  be  had  in  the  desert,  and  urged  on  the  Israelites  to  cry 
out  for  flesh  again,  especially  for  the  flesh  and  the  savoury  vege- 
tables in  which  Egypt  abounded.  The  words  "  thei/  luept  again'^ 
(3V^  used  adverbially,  as  in  Gen.  xxvi.  18,  etc.)  point  back  to  the 
former  complaints  of  the  people  respecting  the  absence  of  flesh  in 
the  desert  of  Sin  (Ex.  xvi.  2  sqq.),  although  there  is  nothing  said 
about  their  weeping  there.  By  the  flesh  which  they  missed,  we  are 
not  to  understand  either  the  fish  which  they  expressly  mention  in 
the  following  verse  (as  in  Lev.  xi.  11),  or  merely  oxen,  sheep,  and 
goats ;  but  the  word  "^^3  signifies  flesh  generally,  as  being  a  better 
kind  of  food  than  the  bread-like  manna.  It  is  true  they  possessed 
herds  of  cattle,  but  these  would  not  have  been  sufficient  to  supply 
their  wants,  as  cattle  could  not  be  bought  for  slaughtering,  and  it 

TENT. — VOL.  III.  B 


G6  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

was  necessary  to  spare  what  they  had.'  The  greedy  people  also 
longed  for  other  flesh,  and  said,  "  We  remember  the  fish  which  we 
ate  in  Egypt  for  nothing,^*  Even  if  fish  could  not  be  had  for  nothing 
in  Egypt,  according  to  the  extravagant  assertions  of  the  murmurers, 
it  is  certain  that  it  could  be  procured  for  such  nominal  prices  that 
even  the  poorest  of  the  people  could  eat  it.  The  abundance  of  the 
fish  in  the  Nile  and  the  neighbouring  waters  is  attested  unanimously 
by  both  classical  writers  (e.g.  Diod.  Sic.  i.  36,  52  ;  Herod,  ii.  93 ; 
Strabo,  xvii.  p.  829)  and  modern  travellers  (cf.  Hengstenberg,  Egypt, 
etc.,  p.  211  Eng.  tr.).  This  also  applies  to  the  vegetables  for  which 
the  Israelites  longed  in  the  desert.  The  ^''^^^p,  or  cucumbers,  which 
are  still  called  katteh  or  chate  in  the  present  day,  are  a  species  differing 
from  the  ordinary  cucumbers  in  size  and  colour,  and  distinguished 
for  softness  and  sweet  flavour,  and  are  described  by  Forskal  (Flor.  J I 
Aeg.  p.  168),  as  fructus  in  j^gypto  omnium  vulgatissimus,  totis  ™' 
plantains  agris.  '^''n^nK  :  water-melons,  which  are  still  called  battieh 
in  modern  Egypt,  and  are  both  cultivated  in  immense  quantities  M\ 
and  sold  so  cheaply  in  the  market,  that  the  poor  as  well  as  the  rich 
can  enjoy  their  refreshing  flesh  and  cooling  juice  (see  Sonnini  in 
Hengstenberg,  ut  sup.  p.  212).  "i^V^  does  not  signify  grass  here,  but,  m 
according  to  the  ancient  versions,  chives,  from  their  grass-like  ap- 
pearance ;  laudatissimus  porrus  in  JEgypto  (Plin.  h.  n.  19,  33). 
DvVil :  onions,  which  flourish  better  in  Egypt  than  elsewhere,  and 
have  a  mild  and  pleasant  taste.  According  to  Herod,  ii.  125,  they 
were  the  ordinary  food  of  the  workmen  at  the  pyramids ;  and,  ac- 
cording  to  Hasselquist,  Sonnini,  and  others,  they  still  form  almost  the  ■ 
only  food  of  the  poor,  and  are  also  a  favourite  dish  with  all  classes, 
either  roasted,  or  boiled  as  a  vegetable,  and  eaten  with  animal  food. 
D''D1B' :  garlic,  which  is  still  called  turn,  tom  in  the  East  {Seetzen,  iii. 
p.  234),  and  is  mentioned  by  Herodotus  in  connection  with  onions, 
as  forming  a  leading  article  of  food  with  the  Egyptian  workmen. 
Of  all  these  things,  which  had  been  cheap  as  well  as  refreshing, 
not  one  was  to  be  had  in  the  desert.  Hence  the  people  complained 
still  further,  "  and  now  our  soul  is  dried  away^^  i.e.  faint  for  want 
of  strong  and  refreshing  food,  and  wanting  in  fresh  vital  power 
(cf.  Ps.  xxii.  16,  cii.  5)  :  "  we  have  nothing  (^3  pi?,  there  is  nothing  ^ 
in  existence,  equivalent  to  nothing  to  be  had)  except  that  our  eye 
(falls)  upon  this  manna"  i.e.  we  see  nothing  else  before  us  but  the 
manna,  sc.  which  has  no  juice,  and  supplies  no  vital  force.  Greedi-  U 
ness  longs  for  juicy  and  savoury  food,  and  in  fact,  as  a  rule,  for  j 
change  of  food  and  stimulating  flavour.     "  This  is  the  perverted 


I 


CHAP.  XI.  10-15.  67 

nature  of  man,  which  cannot  continue  in  the  quiet  enjoyment  of 
what  is  clean  and  unmixed,  but,  from  its  own  inward  discord,  desires 
a  stimulating  admixture  of  what  is  sharp  and  sour"  (Baumgarten), 
To  point  out  this  inward  perversion  on  the  part  of  the  murmuring 
people,  Moses  once  more  described  the  nature,  form,  and  taste  of 
the  manna,  and  its  mode  of  preparation,  as  a  pleasant  food  which 
God  sent  down  to  His  people  with  the  dew  of  heaven  (see  at  Ex. 
xvi.  14,  15,  and  31).  But  this  sweet  bread  of  heaven  wanted  "the 
sharp  and  sour,  which  are  required  to  give  a  stimulating  flavour  to 
the  food  of  man,  on  account  of  his  sinful,  restless  desires,  and  the 
incessant  changes  of  his  earthly  life."  In  this  respect  the  manna 
resembled  the  spiritual  food  supplied  by  the  word  of  God,  of  which 
the  sinful  heart  of  man  may  also  speedily  become  weary^,  and  turn 
to  the  more  piquant  productions  of  the  spirit  of  the  world. 

Vers.  10-15.  When  Moses  heard  the  people  weep,  "  according 
to  their  families,  every  one  before  the  door  of  his  tent,"  i.e.  heard 
complaining  in  all  the  families  in  front  of  every  tent,  so  that  the 
w^eeping  had  become  universal  throughout  the  whole  nation  (cf. 
Zech.  xii.  12  sqq.),  and  the  wrath  of  the  Lord  burned  on  account 
of  it,  and  the  thing  displeased  Moses  also,  he  brought  his  complaint 
to  the  Lord.  The  words  "  Moses  also  was  displeased,^  are  introduced 
as  a  circumstantial  clause,  to  explain  the  matter  more  clearly,  and 
show  the  reason  for  the  complaint  which  Moses  poured  out  before 
the  Lord,  and  do  not  refer  exclusively  either  to  the  murmuring  of 
the  people  or  to  the  wrath  of  Jehovah,  but  to  both  together.  This 
follows  evidently  from  the  position  in  which  the  clause  stands 
between  the  two  antecedent  clauses  in  ver.  10  and  the  apodosis  in 
ver.  11,  and  still  more  evidently  from  the  complaint  of  Moses  which 
follows.  For  "  the  whole  attitude  of  Moses  shows  that  his  dis- 
pleasure was  excited  not  merely  by  the  unrestrained  rebellion  of 
the  people  against  Jehovah,  but  also  by  the  unrestrained  wrath  of 
Jehovah  against  the  nation"  (Kurtz).  But  in  what  was  the  wrath 
of  Jehovah  manifested  ?  It  broke  out  against  the  people  first  of 
all  when  they  had  been  satiated  with  flesh  (ver.  33).  There  is  no 
mention  of  any  earlier  manifestation.  Hence  Moses  can  only  have 
discovered  a  sign  of  the  burning  wrath  of  Jehovah  in  the  fact  that, 
although  the  discontent  of  the  people  burst  forth  in  loud  cries,  God 
did  not  help,  but  withdrew  with  His  help,  and  let  the  whole  storm 
of  the  infuriated  people  burst  upon  him. — Vers.  11  sqq.  In  Moses' 
complaint  there  is  an  unmistakeable  discontent  arising  from  the 
excessive  burden  of  his  office.     "  Why  hast  Thou  done  evil  to  Thy 


THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

servant  ?  and  why  have  I  not  found  favour  in  Thy  sight,  to  lay 
me  the  burden  of  all  this  people  ?"  The  "  burden  of  all  this  people'* 
is  the  expression  which  he  uses  to  denote  "  the  care  of  governino; 
the  people,  and  providing  everything  for  it"  (C.  a.  Lap.),  This 
burden,  which  God  imposed  upon  him  in  connection  with  his  office, 
appeared  to  him  a  bad  and  ungracious  treatment  on  the  part  of 
God.  This  is  the  language  of  the  discontent  of  despair,  which 
differs  from  the  murmuring  of  unbelief,  in  the  fact  that  it  is  ad- 
dressed to  God,  for  the  purpose  of  entreating  help  and  deliverance 
from  Him ;  whereas  unbelief  complains  of  the  ways  of  God,  but 
while  complaining  of  its  troubles,  does  not  pray  to  the  Lord  its  God. 
"  Have  I  conceived  all  this  people"  Moses  continues,  "  or  have  I 
brought  it  forth,  that  Thou  requirest  me  to  carry  it  in  my  bosom,  as  a 
nursing  father  carries  the  suckling,  into  the  promised  land?"  He 
does  not  intend  by  these  words  to  throw  off  entirely  all  care  for  the 
people,  but  simply  to  plead  with  God  that  the  duty  of  carrying  and 
providing  for  Israel  rests  with  Him,  the  Creator  and  Father  of- 
Israel  (Ex.  iv.  22  ;  Isa.  Ixiii.  16).  Moses,  a  weak  man,  was  wanting 
in  the  omnipotent  power  which  alone  could  satisfy  the  crying  of 
the  people  for  flesh.  vV  132),  "  they  weep  unto  me,"  i.e.  they  come 
weeping  to  ask  me  to  relieve  their  distress.  "  /  am  not  able  to  carry 
this  burden  alone ;  it  is  too  heavy  for  me." — Ver.  15.  "7/*  Thou 
deal  thus  with  me,  then  kill  me  quite  (^'in  inf.  abs.,  expressive  of  the 
uninterrupted  process  of  killing ;  see  Ewald,  §  280,  b.),  if  I  have 
found  favour  in  Thine  eyes  (i.e.  if  Thou  wilt  show  me  favour),  and 
let  me  not  see  my  misfortune."  "My  misfortune :"  i.e.  the  calamity 
to  which  I  must  eventually  succumb. 

Vers.  16-23.  There  was  good  ground  for  his  complaint.  The 
burden  of  the  office  laid  upon  the  shoulders  of  Moses  was  really  too 
heavy  for  one  man ;  and  even  the  discontent  which  broke  out  in  the 
complaint  was  nothing  more  than  an  outpouring  of  zeal  for  the 
office  assigned  him  by  God,  under  the  burden  of  which  his  strength 
would  eventually  break  down,  unless  he  received  some  support.  He 
was  not  tired  of  the  office,  but  would  stake  his  life  for  it  if  God 
did  not  relieve  him  in  some  way,  as  office  and  life  were  really  one 
in  him.  Jehovah  therefore  relieved  him  in  the  distress  of  which 
he  complained,  without  blaming  the  words  of  His  servant,  which 
bordered  on  despair.  "  Gather  unto  Me"  He  said  to  Moses  (vers. 
16,  17),  "  seventy  men  of  the  elders  of  Israel,  whom  thou  knowest  as 
elders  and  officers  {shoterim,  see  Ex.  v.  6)  of  the  people,  and  bring 
them  unto  the  tabernacle,  that  they  may  place  tliemselves  there  loith 


CHAP.  XL  24-30.  69 

thee,  I  will  come  down  (see  at  ver.  25)  and  speak  with  thee  there, 
and  will  take  of  the  spirit  which  is  upon  thee,  and  will  put  it  upon 
thein,  that  tliey  may  hear  the  burden  of  the  people  icith  thee^ — Vers. 
18  sqq.  Jehovah  would  also  relieve  the  complaining  of  the  people, 
and  that  in  such  a  way  that  the  murmurers  should  experience  at 
the  same  time  the  holiness  of  His  judgments.  The  people  were  to 
sanctify  themselves  for  the  next  day,  and  were  then  to  eat  flesh 
(receive  flesh  to  eat).  ^PO"?  (as  in  Ex.  xix.  10),  to  prepare  them- 
selves by  purifications  for  the  revelation  of  the  glory  of  God  in  the 
miraculous  gift  of  flesh.  Jehovah  would  give  them  flesh,  so  that 
they  should  eat  it  not  one  day,  or  two,  or  five,  or  ten,  or  twenty, 
but  a  whole  month  long  (of  "  days,"  as  in  Gen.  xxix.  14,  xli.  1), 
"  till  it  come  out  of  your  nostrils,  and  become  loathsome  unto  you," 
as  a  punishment  for  having  despised  Jehovah  in  the  midst  of  them, 
in  their  contempt  of  the  manna  given  by  God,  and  for  having 
shown  their  regret  at  leaving  the  land  of  Egypt  in  their  longing  for 
the  provisions  of  that  land. — Vers.  21  sqq.  When  Moses  thereupon 
expressed  his  amazement  at  the  promise  of  God  to  provide  flesh 
for  600,000  men  for  a  whole  month  long  even  to  satiety,  and  said, 
"  Shall  flocks  and  herds  he  slain  for  them,  to  suffice  them  ?  or  shall  all 
the  fish  of  the  sea  he  gathered  together  for  them,  to  suffice  them  ?"  he 
was  answered  by  the  words,  "  Is  the  ai^m  of  Jehovah  too  short  {i.e. 
does  it  not  reach  far  enough ;  is  it  too  weak  and  powerless)  ?  Thou 
shalt  see  now  whether  My  word  shall  come  to  pass  unto  thee  or  not^ 

Vers.  24-30.  After  receiving  from  the  Lord  this  reply  to  his 
complaint,  Moses  went  out  (sc.  "  of  the  tabernacle,"  where  he  had 
laid  his  complaint  before  the  Lord)  into  the  camp  ;  and  having 
made  known  to  the  people  the  will  of  God,  gathered  together 
seventy  men  of  the  elders  of  the  people,  and  directed  them  to  station 
themselves  around  the  tabernacle.  ^' Around  the  tabernacle,"  does 
not  signify  in  this  passage  on  all  four  sides,  but  in  a  semicircle 
around  the  front  of  the  tabernacle ;  the  verb  is  used  in  this  sense 
in  chap.  xxi.  4,  when  it  is  applied  to  the  march  round  Edom. — 
Ver.  25.  Jehovah  then  came  down  in  the  cloud,  which  soared  on 
high  above  the  tabernacle,  and  now  came  down  to  the  door  of  it 
(chap.  xii.  5;  Ex.  xxxiii.  9;  Deut.  xxxi.  15).  The  statement  in 
chap.  ix.  18  sqq.,  and  Ex.  xl.  37,  38,  that  the  cloud  dwelt  (|3^) 
above  the  dwelling  of  the  tabernacle  during  the  time  of  encamp- 
ment, can  be  reconciled  with  this  without  any  difficulty  ;  since  the 
only  idea  that  we  can  form  of  this  "  dwelling  upon  it"  is,  that  the 
cloud  stood  still,  soaring  in  quietness  above  tlie  tabernacle,  without 


)F  MOSES. 

moving  to  and  fro  like  a  cloud  driven  by  the  wind.  There  is 
such  discrepancy,  therefore,  as  Knohel  finds  in  these  statements. 
When  Jehovah  had  come  down,  He  spoke  to  Moses,  sc.  to  explain 
to  him  and  to  the  elders  what  was  about  to  be  done,  and  then  laid 
upon  the  seventy  elders  of  the  Spirit  which  was  upon  him.  We 
are  not  to  understand  this  as  implying,  that  the  fulness  of  the  Spirit 
possessed  by  Moses  was  diminished  in  consequence ;  still  less  to 
regard  it,  with  Calvin,  as  signum  indignationis,  or  nota  ignominice, 
which  God  intended  to  stamp  upon  him.  For  the  Spirit  of  God  is 
not  something  material,  which  is  diminished  by  being  divided,  but 
resembles  a  flame  of  fire,  which  does  not  decrea'se  in  intensity,  but 
increases  rather  by  extension.  As  Theodoret  observed,  "  Just  as  a 
person  who  kindles  a  thousand  flames  from  one,  does  not  lessen  the 
first,  whilst  he  communicates  light  to  the  others,  so  God  did  not 
diminish  the  grace  imparted  to  Moses  by  the  fact  that  He  com- 
municated of  it  to  the  seventy."  God  did  this  to  show  to  Moses, 
as  well  as  to  the  whole  nation,  that  the  Spirit  which  Moses  had 
received  was  perfectly  sufficient  for  the  performance  of  the  duties 
of  his  office,  and  that  no  supernatural  increase  of  that  Spirit  was 
needed,  but  simply  a  strengthening  of  the  natural  powers  of  Moses  a  I 
by  the  support  of  men  who,  when  endowed  with  the  power  of  the  "  I 
Spirit  that  was  taken  from  him,  would  help  him  to  bear  the  burden  \ 
of  his  office.  We  have  no  description  of  the  way  in  which  this 
transference  took  place ;  it  is  therefore  impossible  to  determine 
whether  it  was  effected  by  a  sign  which  would  strike  the  outward  _j 
senses,  or  passed  altogether  within  the  sphere  of  the  Spirit's  life,  in  1 1 
a  manner  which  corresponded  to  the  nature  of  the  Spirit  itself.  In  - 
any  case,  however,  it  must  have  been  effected  in  such  a  way,  that 
Moses  and  the  elders  received  a  convincing  proof  of  the  reality  of 
the  affair.  When  the  Spirit  descended  upon  the  elders,  "  they 
'prophesied,  and  did  not  add ;"  Le,  they  did  not  repeat  the  prophe- 
syings  any  further.  ^SpJ  fc<71  is  rendered  correctly  by  the  LXX., 
ical  ov/c  €TL  TTpocreOevTo ;  the  rendering  supported  by  the  Vulgate 
and  Onkelos,  nee  idtro  cessaverunt  ("  and  ceased  not"),  is  incorrect. 
t^SJnHj  "  to  prophesy, ^^  is  to  be  understood  generally,  and  especially 
here,  not  as  the  foretelling  of  future  things,  but  as  speaking  in  an 
ecstatic  and  elevated  state  of  mind,  under  the  impulse  and  inspira- 
tion of  the  Spirit  of  God,  just  like  the  "  speaking  with  tongues," 
which  frequently  followed  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  days  ■  I 
of  the  apostles.  But  we  are  not  to  infer  from  the  fact,  that  the 
prophesying  was  not  repeated,  that  the  Spirit  therefore  departed 


I 


CHAP.  XI.  24-30.  71 

from  them  after  this  one  extraordinary  manifestation.  This  mira- 
culous manifestation  of  the  Spirit  was  intended  simply  to  give  to 
the  whole  nation  the  visible  proof  that  God  had  endowed  them  with 
His  Spirit,  as  helpers  of  Moses,  and  had  given  them  the  authority 
required  for  the  exercise  of  their  calling. — Ver.  26.  But  in  order 
to  prove  to  the  whole  congregation  that  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  was 
working  there,  the  Spirit  came  not  only  upon  the  elders  assembled 
round  Moses,  and  in  front  of  the  tabernacle,  but  also  upon  two 
of  the  persons  who  had  been  chosen,  viz.  Eldad  and  Medad,  who 
had  remained  behind  in  the  camp,  for  some  reason  that  is  not 
reported,  so  that  they  also  prophesied.  "  Them  that  were  written^' 
conscripti,  for  "  called,"  because  the  calling  of  the  elders  generally 
took  place  in  writing,  from  which  we  may  see  how  thoroughly  the 
Israelites  had  acquired  the  art  of  writing  in  Egypt. — Vers.  27,  28. 
This  phenomenon  in  the  camp  itself  produced  such  excitement,  that 
a  boy  ("iVSn,  with  the  article  like  i^vSn  in  Gen.  xiv.  13)  reported 
the  thing  to  Moses,  whereupon  Joshua  requested  Moses  to  prohibit 
the  two  from  prophesying.  Joshua  felt  himself  warranted  in  doing 
this,  because  he  had  been  Moses'  servant  from  his  youth  up  (see  at 
Ex.  xvii.  9),  and  in  this  capacity  he  regarded  the  prophesying  of 
these  men  in  the  camp  as  detracting  from  the  authority  of  his  lord, 
since  they  had  not  received  this  gift  from  Moses,  at  least  not 
through  his  mediation.  Joshua  was  jealous  for  the  honour  of 
Moses,  just  as  the  disciples  of  Jesus,  in  Mark  ix.  38,  39,  were  for 
the  honour  of  their  Lord ;  and  he  was  reproved  by  Moses,  as  the 
latter  afterwards  were  by  Christ. — Ver.  29.  Moses  replied,  "  Art 
thou  jealous  for  me  ?  Woidd  that  all  the  Lord^s  people  were  prophets, 
that  Jehovah  would  put  His  Spirit  upon  them  /"  As  a  true  servant 
of  God,  who  sought  not  his  own  glory,  but  the  glory  of  his  God, 
and  the  spread  of  His  kingdom,  Moses  rejoiced  in  this  manifesta- 
tion of  the  Spirit  of  God  in  the  midst  of  the  nation,  and  desired 
that  all  might  become  partakers  of  this  grace. — Ver.  30.  Moses 
returned  with  the  elders  into  the  camp,  sc.  from  the  tabernacle, 
which  stood  upon  an  open  space  in  the  midst  of  the  camp,  at  some 
distance  from  the  tents  of  the  Levites  and  the  rest  of  the  tribes  of 
Israel,  which  were  pitched  around  it,  so  that  whoever  wished  to  go 
to  it,  had  first  of  all  to  go  out  of  his  tent.^ 

^  For  the  purpose  of  overthrowing  the  historical  character  of  this  marvellous 
event,  the  critics,  from  Vater  to  Knohel^  have  identified  the  appointment  of  the 
seventy  elders  to  support  ^Moses  with  the  judicial  institute  established  at  Sinai 
by  the  advice  of  Jethro  (Ex.  xviii.),   and  adduce  the  obvious  differences 


72  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


No  account  has  been  handed  down  of  the  further  action  of  this 
committee  of  elders.     It  is  impossible  to  determine,  therefore,  in 
what  way  they  assisted  Moses  in  bearing  the  burden  of  governing       - 
the  people.     All  that  can  be  regarded  as  following  unquestionably  ■■ 
from  the  purpose  given  here  is,  that  they  did  not  form  a  permanent 
body,  which  continued  from  the  time  of  Moses  to  the  Captivity,  and 
after  the  Captivity  was  revived  again  in  the  Sanhedrim,  as  Tal-  ■I 
mudists,  Rabbins,  and  many  of  the  earlier  theologians  suppose  (see 
Selden  de  Synedriis^  I.  i.  c.  14,  ii.  c,  4  ;  Jo.  Marchii  sylloge  disser- 
tatt.  pliil.  ilieoL  ad  V.  T.  exercit.  12,  pp.  343  sqq.).    On  the  opposite 
side  vid.  Helandi  Antiquitates^  ss.  ii.  7,  3  ;   Carpz.  apparat.  pp.  573 
sq.,  etc. 

Vers.  31-34.  As  soon  as  Moses  had  returned  with  the  elders 
into  the  camp,  God  fulfilled  His  second  promise.  ''^  A  wind  arose  Am 
from  Jehovah,  and  brought  quails  (salvim,  see  Ex.  xvi.  13)  over  from  ■■ 
the  sea,  and  threw  them  over  the  camp  about  a  days  journey  wide 
from  here  and  there  (i.e.  on  both  sides),  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the 
camp,  and  about  two  cubits  above  the  surfaced  The  wind  v/as  a 
south-east  wind  (Ps.  Ixxviii.  26),  which  blew  from  the  Arabian 
Gulf  and  brought  the  quails — which  fly  northwards  in  the  spring 
from  the  interior  of  Africa  in  very  great  numbers  (see  vol.  ii.  p. 
67) — from  the  sea  to  the  Israelites.  na,  which  only  occurs  here 
and  in  the  Psalm  of  Moses  (Ps.  xc.  10),  signifies  to  drive  over,  in 

between  these  two  entirely  different  institutions  as  arguments  for  the  supposed 
diversity  of  documents  and  legends.  But  what  ground  is  there  for  identifying 
things  so  totally  different  from  one  another  ?  The  assertion  of  Knobel^  that  in 
Deut.  i.  9-18,  Moses  "  evidently"  refers  to  both  events  (Ex.  xviii.  and  Num.  xi.), 
is  unfounded  and  untrue.  Or  are  the  same  oflBcial  duties  and  rank  assigned  to 
the  elders  who  were  chosen  as  judges  in  Ex.  xviii.,  as  to  the  seventy  elders  who 
were  called  by  God,  and  endowed  with  His  Spirit,  that  they  might  help  Moses 
to  govern  the  people  who  had  rebelled  against  him  and  against  Jehovah  on 
account  of  the  want  of  flesh,  and  to  restore  and  uphold  the  authority  of  Moses 
as  the  divinely  chosen  leader  of  Israel,  which  had  been  shaken  thereby  ?  Can 
the  judges  of  a  land  be  identified  without  reserve  with  the  executive  of  the  «■ 
land?  The  mere  fact,  that  this  executive  court  was  chosen,  like  the  judges,  fll 
from  the  whole  body  of  elders,  does  not  warrant  us  in  identifying  the  two 
institutions.  Nor  does  it  follow  from  the  fact,  that  at  Sinai  seventy  of  the  elders 
of  Israel  ascended  the  mountain  with  Moses,  Aaron,  and  his  sons,  and  there  saw 
God  (Ex.  xxiv.  9  sqq.),  that  the  seventy  persons  chosen  here  were  the  same 
as  the  seventy  mentioned  there.  The  sameness  of  the  numbers  does  not  prove 
that  the  persons  were  the  same,  but  simply  that  the  number  seventy  was  the 
most  suitable,  on  account  of  its  historical  and  symbolical  significance,  to  form 
a  representation  of  the  whole  body  of  the  people.  For  a  further  refutation  of 
this  futile  objection,  see  Ranke,  Unterss.  ilb.  d.  Pent.  II.  pp.  183  sqq. 


CHAP.  XL  31-34.  73 

Arabic  and  Syrlac  to  pass  over,  not  "  to  cut  off,"  as  the  Rabbins 
suppose :  the  -wind  cut  off  the  quails  from  the  sea.  K^^J,  to  throw 
them  scattered  about  (Ex.  xxix.  5,  xxxi.  12,  xxxii.  4).  The  idea 
is  not  that  the  wind  caused  the  flock  of  quails  to  spread  itself  out 
as  much  as  two  days'  journey  over  the  camp,  and  to  fly  about  two 
cubits  above  the  surface  of  the  ground ;  so  that,  being  exhausted 
with  their  flight  across  the  sea,  they  fell  pai»tly  into  the  hands  of 
the  Israelites  and  partly  upon  the  ground,  as  Knohel  follows  the 
Vulgate  (volahant  in  aere  duohus  cuhitis  altitudine  super  terram)  and 
many  of  the  Rabbins  in  supposing :  for  njn^n  bv  ^^^  does  not 
mean  to  cause  to  fly  or  spread  out  over  the  camp,  but  to  throw 
over  or  upon  the  camp.  The  words  cannot  therefore  be  understood 
in  any  other  way  than  they  are  in  Ps.  Ixxviii.  27,  28,  viz.  that  the 
wind  threw  them  about  over  the  camp,  so  that  they  fell  upon  the 
ground  a  day's  journey  on  either  side  of  it,  and  that  in  such  num- 
bers that  they  la}^,  of  course  not  for  the  whole  distance  mentioned, 
but  in  places  about  the  camp,  as  much  as  two  cubits  deep.  It  is  only 
in  this  sense  of  the  words,  that  the  people  could  possibly  gather 
quails  the  whole  of  that  day,  the  whole  night,  and  the  whole  of  the 
next  day,  in  such  quantities  that  he  who  had  gathered  but  little 
had  collected  ten  homers.  A  homer,  the  largest  measure  of  capacity 
among  the  Hebrews,  which  contained  ten  ephahs,  held,  according 
to  the  lower  reckoning  of  Thenius,  10,143  Parisian  inches,  or  about 
two  bushels  Dresden  measure.  By  this  enormous  quantity,  which 
so  immensely  surpassed  the  natural  size  of  the  flocks  of  quails,  God 
purposed  to  show  the  people  His  power,  to  give  them  flesh  not  for 
one  day  or  several  days,  but  for  a  whole  month,  both  to  put  to 
shame  their  unbelief,  and  also  to  punish  their  greediness.  As  they 
could  not  eat  this  quantity  all  at  once,  they  spread  them  round  the 
camp  to  dry  in  the  sun,  in  the  same  manner  in  which  the  Egyp- 
tians are  in  the  habit  of  drying  fish  (Herod,  ii.  77). — Ver.  3?i.  But 
while  the  flesh  was  still  between  their  teeth,  and  before  it  was 
ground,  i.e,  masticated,  the  wrath  of  the  Lord  burned  against  them, 
and  produced  among  the  people  a  very  great  destruction.  This 
catastrophe  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  "the  effect  of  the  excessive 
quantity  of  quails  that  they  had  eaten,  on  account  of  the  quails 
feeding  upon  thmgs  which  are  injurious  to  man,  so  that  eating  the 
flesh  of  quails  produces  convulsions  and  giddiness  (for  proofs,  see 
Bochart,  Hieroz,  ii.  pp.  657  sqq.),"  as  Knohel  supposes,  but  as  an 
extraordinary  judgment  inflicted  by  God  upon  the  greedy  people, 
by  which  a  great  multitude  of  people  were  suddenly  swept  away. 


74  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

— Yei\  34.  From  this  judgment  the  place  of  encampment  received 
the  name  Kibroih-haftaavah,  Le.  graves  of  greediness,  because  there 
the  people  found  their  graves  while  giving  vent  to  their  greedy- 
desires. 

Ver.  35.  From  the  graves  of  greediness  the  people  removed  to 
Hazeroth,  and  there  they  remained  (^^'^  as  in  Ex.  xxiv.  12).  The  ' 
situation  of  these  two  places  of  encampment  is  altogether  unknown,  fll 
Hazerothj  it  is  true,  has  been  regarded  by  many  since  Burckhardt 
(Syr.  p.  808)  as  identical  with  the  modern  Hadhra  (in  RohinsovUs 
Pal.  Ain  el  Iludhera),  eighteen  hours  to  the  north-east  of  Sinai, 
partly  because  of  the  resemblance  in  the  name,  and  partly  because 
there  are  not  only  low  palm-trees  and  bushes  there,  but  also  a 
spring,  of  which  Robinson  says  (Pal.  i.  p.  223)  that  it  is  the  only 
spring  in  the  neighbourhood,  and  yields  tolerably  good  water, 
though  somewhat  brackish,  the  whole  year  round.  But  Hadhra 
does  not  answer  to  the  Hebrew  "i^n,  to  shut  in,  from  which 
Hazeroth  (enclosures)  is  derived ;  and  there  are  springs  in  many 
other  places  in  the  desert  of  et  Tih  with  both  drinkable  and  brack- 
ish water.  Moreover,  the  situation  of  this  well  does  not  point  to 
Hadhra,  which  is  only  two  days'  journey  from  Sinai,  so  that  the 
Israelites  might  at  any  rate  have  pitched  their  tents  by  this  well 
after  their  first  journey  of  three  days  (chap.  x.  33),  whereas  they 
took  three  days  to  reach  the  graves  of  lust,  and  then  marched  from 
thence  to  Hazeroth.  Consequently  they  would  only  have  come  to 
Hadhra  on  the  supposition  that  they  had  been  about  to  take  the 
road  to  the  sea,  and  intended  to  march  along  the  coast  to  the 
Arabah,  and  so  on  through  the  Arabah  to  the  Dead  Sea  {Robinson, 
p.  223) ;  in  which  case,  however,  they  would  not  have  arrived  at 
Kadesh.  The  conjecture  that  Kibroth-hattaavah  is  the  same  as 
Di-Sahab  (Deut.  i.  1),  the  modern  Dahab  (Mersa  Dahab,  Minna  el 
DahaV),  to  the  east  of  Sinai,  on  the  Elanitic  Gulf,  is  still  more 
untenable.  For  what  end  could  be  answered  by  such  a  circuitous 
route,  which,  instead  of  bringing  the  Israelites  nearer  to  the  end  of 
their  journey,  would  have  taken  them  to  Mecca  rather  than  to 
Canaan  %  As  the  Israelites  proceeded  from  Hazeroth  to  Kadesh 
in  the  desert  of  Paran  (chap.  xiii.  3  and  '^^),  they  must  have 
marched  from  Sinai  to  Canaan  by  the  most  direct  route,  through 
the  midst  of  the  great  desert  of  et  Tih,  most  probably  by  the  desert 
road  which  leads  from  the  Wady  es  Sheikh  into  the  Wady  ez-Zura' 
7iuk,  which  breaks  through  the  southern  border  mountains  of  et  Tih^ 
and  passes  on  through  the  Wady  ez-Zalakah  over  el  Ain  to  Bir-et 


CHAP.  XIL  1-3.  75 

Themmed,  and  then  due  north  past  Jebel  Araif  to  the  Hebron 
road.  By  this  route  they  could  go  from  Horeb  to  Kadesh  Barnea 
in  eleven  days  (Deut.  i.  2),  and  it  is  here  that  we  are  to  seek  for 
the  two  stations  in  question.  Hazeroth  is  probably  to  be  found,  as 
Fries  and  Kurtz  suppose,  in  Bir-et-Themmed,  and  Kihroili-hatta- 
avail  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  southern  border  mountains  of 
et  Tih. 

REBELLION  OF  MIRIAM  AND  AARON  AGAINST  MOSES. — CHAP.  XII. 

Vers.  1-3.  All  the  rebellions  of  the  people  hitherto  had  arisen 
from  dissatisfaction  with  the  privations  of  the  desert  march,  and 
had  been  directed  against  Jehovah  rather  than  against  Moses. 
And  if,  in  the  case  of  the  last  one,  at  Kibroth-hattaavah,  even 
Moses  was  about  to  lose  heart  under  the  heavy  burden  of  his  office ; 
the  faithful  covenant  God  had  given  the  whole  nation  a  practical 
proof,  in  the  manner  in  which  He  provided  him  support  in  the 
seventy  elders,  that  He  had  not  only  laid  the  burden  of  the  whole 
nation  upon  His  servant  Moses,  but  had  also  communicated  to  him 
the  power  of  His  Spirit,  which  was  requisite  to  enable  him  to  carry 
this  burden.  Thus  not  only  was  his  heart  filled  with  new  courage 
when  about  to  despair,  but  his  official  position  in  relation  to  all  the 
Israelites  was  greatly  exalted.  This  elevation  of  Moses  excited 
envy  on  the  part  of  his  brother  and  sister,  whom  God  had  also 
richly  endowed  and  placed  so  high,  that  Miriam  was  distinguished 
as  a  prophetess  above  all  the  women  of  Israel,  whilst  Aaron  had  been 
raised  by  his  investiture  with  the  high-priesthood  into  the  spiritual 
head  of  the  whole  nation.  But  the  pride  of  the  natural  heart  was 
not  satisfied  with  this.  They  would  dispute  with  their  brother  Moses 
the 'pre-eminence  of  his  special  calling  and  his  exclusive  position, 
which  they  might  possibly  regard  themselves  as  entitled  to  contest 
with  him  not  only  as  his  brother  and  sister,  but  also  as  the  nearest 
supporters  of  his  vocation.  Miriam  was  the  instigator  of  the  open 
rebellion,  as  we  may  see  both  from  the  fact  that  her  name  stands 
before  that  of  Aaron,  and  also  from  the  use  of  the  feminine  verb 
"iHin  in  ver.  1.  Aaron  followed  her,  being  no  more  able  to  resist 
the  suggestions  of  his  sister,  than  he  had  formerly  been  to  resist  the 
desire  of  the  people  for  a  golden  idol  (Ex.  xxxii.).  Miriam  found 
an  occasion  for  the  manifestation  of  her  discontent  in  the  Cushite 
wife  whom  Moses  had  taken.  This  wife  cannot  have  been  Zip- 
porah  the   Midianite :    for   even   though   Miriam   might   possibly 


iOOK  OF  M( 

have  called  her  a   Cushite,  whether  because  the   Cushite  tribes 
dwelt  in  Arabia,  or  in  a  contemptuous  sense  as  a  Moor  or  Hamite, 
the  author  would  certainly  not  have  confirmed  this  at  all  events    j 
inaccurate,  if  not  contemptuous  epithet,  by  adding,  "/or  he  hadmk 
taken  a    CusJiite  loife;^^    to  say  nothing  of  the  improbability  of 
Miriam  having  made  the  marriage  which  her  brother  had  con- _y 
tracted  when  he  was  a  fugitive  in  a  foreign  land,  long  before  hell 
was  called  by  God,  the  occasion  of  reproach  so  many  years  after- 
wards.  It  would  be  quite  different  if,  a  short  time  before,  probably 
after  tlie  death  of  Zipporah,  he  had  contracted  a  second  marriage 
with  a  Cushite  woman,  who  either  sprang  from  the  Cushites  dwell- 
ing in  Arabia,  or  from  the  foreigners  who  had  come  out  of  Egypt 
along  with  the  Israelites.   This  marriage  would  not  have  been  wrong 
in  itself,  as  God  had  merely  forbidden  the  Israelites  to  marry  the 
daughters  of  Canaan  (Ex.  xxxiv.  16),  even  if  Moses  had  not  con- 
tracted it  "  with  the  deliberate  intention  of  setting  forth  through  this 
marriage  with  a  Hamite  woman  the  fellowship  between  Israel  and 
the  heathen,  so  far  as  it  could  exist  under  the  law ;  and  thus  prac- 
tically exemplifying  in  his  own  person  that  equality  between  the 
foreigners  and  Israel  which  the  law  demanded  in  various  w'ays"«l 
{Baumgarten)^  or  of  "prefiguring  by  this  example  the  future  union 
of  Israel  with  the  most  remote  of  the  heathen,"  as  0.  v,  Gerlach     y 
and  many  of  the  fathers  suppose.      In  the  taunt  of  the  brother™  I 
and  sister,  however,  we  meet  with  that  carnal  exaggeration  of  the 
Israelitish  nationality  which  forms  so  all-pervading  a  characteristic 
of  this  nation,  and  is  the  more  reprehensible  the  more  it  rests  upon 
the  ground  of  nature  rather  than  upon  the  spiritual  calling  of  Israel 
(Kurtz). — Ver.   2.   Miriam  and  Aaron  said,  "  Hath  Jehovah  then 
spoken  only  by  Moses,  and  not  also  by  usV^     Are  not  we — the  high 
])riest  Aaron,  who  brings  the  rights  of  the  congregation  before 
Jehovah  in  the  Urim  and  Thummim  (Ex.  xxviii.  30),  and  the 
prophetess  Miriam  (Ex.  xv.    20) — also  organs  and  mediators  oi\ 
divine  revelation  ?     "  They  are  proud  of  the  prophetic  gift,  which 
ought  rather  to  have  fostered  modesty  in  them.     But  such  is  thej 
depravity  of  human  nature,  that  they  not  only  abuse  the  gifts  of ^ 
God  towards  the  brother  whom  they  despise,  but  by  an  ungodly 
and  sacrilegious  glorification  extol  the  gifts  themselves  in  such  a. 
manner  as  to  hide  the  Author  of  the  gifts"  (Calvin). — ''And  Jeho-\ 
vah  heard''     This  is  stated  for  the  purpose  of  preparing  the  wayj 
for  the  judicial  interposition  of  God.     When  God  hears  wdiat  is| 
wrong,  He  must  proceed  to  stop  it  by  punishment.     Moses  mightj 


I 


CHAP.  XII.  1-3.  77 

also  have  heard  wliat  they  said,  but  "  the  man  Moses  teas  very  meeh 
{irpav^j  LXX.,  7722^/5,  Yulg.;  not  ^plagued/^^'^pZa^^jasii^^/i^r  renders 
it),  more  than  all  men  upon  the  earth"  No  one  approached  Moses 
in  meekness,  because  no  one  was  raised  so  high  by  God  as  he  was. 
The  higher  the  position  which  a  man  occupies  among  liis  fellow- 
men,  the  harder  is  it  for  the  natural  man  to  bear  attacks  upon  him- 
self with  meekness,  especially  if  they  are  directed  against  his  official 
rank  and  honour.  This  remark  as  to  the  character  of  Moses  serves 
to  bring  out  to  view  the  position  of  the  person  attacked,  and  points 
out  the  reason  why  Moses  not  only  abstained  from  all  self-defence, 
but  did  not  even  cry  to  God  for  vengeance  on  account  of  the  injury 
that  had  been  done  to  him.  Because  he  was  the  meekest  of  all 
men,  he  could  calmly  leave  this  attack  upon  himself  to  the  all-wise 
and  righteous  Judge,  who  had  both  called  and  qualified  him  for  his 
office.  "  For  this  is  the  idea  of  the  eulogium  of  his  meekness.  It 
is  as  if  Moses  had  said  that  he  had  swallowed  the  injury  in  silence, 
inasmuch  as  he  had  imposed  a  law  of  patience  upon  himself  because 
of  his  meekness"  (^Calvin). 

The  self-praise  on  the  part  of  Moses,  which  many  have  dis- 
covered in  this  description  of  his  character,  and  on  account  of 
which  some  even  of  the  earlier  expositors  regarded  this  verse  as  a 
later  gloss,  whilst  more  recent  critics  have  used  it  as  an  argument 
against  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch,  is  not  an  ex- 
pression of  vain  self-display,  or  a  glorification  of  his  own  gifts 
and  excellences,  which  he  prided  himself  upon  possessing  above  all 
others.  It  is  simply  a  statement,  which  was  indispensable  to  a  full 
and  correct  interpretation  of  all  the  circumstances,  and  which  was 
made  quite  objectively,  with  reference  to  the  character  which 
Moses  had  not  given  to  himself  but  had  acquired  through  the 
grace  of  God,  and  which  he  never  falsified  from  the  very  time  of 
his  calling  until  the  day  of  his  death,  either  at  the  rebellion  of  the 
people  at  Kibroth-hattaavah  (chap,  xi.),  or  at  the  water  of  strife 
at  Kadesh  (chap.  xx.).  His  despondency  under  the  heavy  burden 
of  his  office  in  the  former  case  (chap,  xi.)  speaks  rather  for  than 
against  the  meekness  of  his  character;  and  the  sin  at  Kadesh 
(chap.  XX.)  consisted  simply  in  the  fact,  that  he  suffered  himself  to 
be  brought  to  doubt  either  the  omnipotence  of  God,  or  the  pos- 
sibility of  divine  help,  on  account  of  the  unbelief  of  the  people.^ 

^  There  is  not  a  word  in  Num.  xx.  10  or  Ps.  cvi.  32  to  the  effect,  tliat 
"  his  dissatisfaction  broke  out  into  evident  passion  "  (Kurtz).  And  it  is  quite  a 
mistake  to  observe,  that  in  the  case  before  us  there  was  nothing  at  all  to  pro- 


^1 

1C  ■■ 


78  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

No  doubt  it  was  only  such  a  man  as  Moses  who  could  speak 
himself  in  such  a  way, — a  man  who  had  so  entirely  sacrificed  his 
own  personality  to  the  office  assigned  him  by  the  Lord,  that  he 
was  ready  at  any  moment  to  stake  his  life  for  the  cause  and  glory  of 
the  Lord  (cf.  chap.  xi.  15,  and  Ex.  xxxii.  32),  and  of  whom  CalmeMM 
observes  with  as  much  truth  as  force,  "  As  he  praises  himself  her^l 
without  pride,  so  he  will  blame  himself  elsewhere  with  humility," 
— a  man  of  God  whose  character  is  not  to  be  measured  by  the 
standard  of  ordinary  men  (cf.  Hengstenberg,  Dissertations,  vol.  ii* 
pp.  141  sqq.). 

Vers.  4-10.  Jehovah  summoned  the  opponents  of  His  serva 
to  come  at  once  before  His  judgment-seat.     He  commanded  Moses,^ 
Aaron,    and   Miriam   suddenly  to  come  out  of  the  camp  (see  at    , 
chap.  xi.  30)  to  the  tabernacle.     Then  He  Himself  came  down  in  I 
a  pillar  of  cloud  to  the  door  of  the  tabernacle,  i.e.  to  the  entranc^ 
to  the  court,  not  to  the  dwelling  itself,  and   called   Aaron  and 
Miriam  out,  i.e.  commanded  them  to  come  out  of  the  court,^  and 
said  to  them  (vers.  6  sqq.) :  "  If  there  is  a  prophet  of  Jehovah  to 
you  (i.e,  if  you  have  one),  /  make  Myself  knoxcn  to  him  in  a  vision ; 
I  speak  to  him  in  a  dream  (i3,  lit.  "  m  /iim,"  inasmuch  as  a  reveh 
tion  in  a  dream  fell  within  the  inner  sphere  of  the  soul-life).    Not 
so  My  servant  Moses :  he  is  approved  in  My  whole  house ;  mouth  to 
mouth  I  speak  to  him,  and  as  an  appearance,  and  that  not  in  enigmas  m  I 
and  he  sees  the  form  of  Jehovah.     Why  are  ye  not  afraid  to  speak 
against  My  servant,  against  Moses  ?  "     ^?^''?P  —  ^r?  ^""^J?  the  suffix 
used  with  the  noun  instead  of  the  separate  pronoun  in  the  dative, 
as  in  Gen.  xxxix.  21,  Lev.  xv.  3,  etc.     The  noun  Jehovah  is  in  ^Ul 
probability  to  be  taken  as  a  genitive,  in  connection  with  the  wor<P' 

voke  Moses  to  appeal  to  his  meekness,  since  it  was  not  his  meekness  that  Miriam 
had  disputed,  but  only  his  prophetic  call.  If  such  grounds  as  these  are  inter- 
polated into  the  words  of  Moses,  and  it  is  to  be  held  that  an  attack  upon  the 
prophetic  calling  does  not  involve  such  an  attack  upon  the  person  as  might 
have  excited  anger,  it  is  certainly  impossible  to  maintain  the  Mosaic  authorshi 
of  this  statement  as  to  the  character  of  Moses ;  for  the  vanity  of  wishing 
procure  the  recognition  of  his  meekness  by  praising  it,  cannot  certainly 
imputed  to  Moses  the  man  of  God. 

1  The  discrepancy  discovered  by  Kndbel^  in  the  fact  that,  according  to  the 
so-called  Elohist,  no  one  but  Moses,  Aaron,  and  the  sons  of  Aaron  were  allowed 
to  enter  the  sanctuary,  whereas,  according  to  the  Jehovist,  others  did  so, — 
e.g.  Miriam  here,  and  Joshua  in  Ex.  xxxiii.  11, — crests  entirely  upon  a  ground 
less  fancy,  arising  from  a  misinterpretation,  as  there  is  not  a  word  abo 
entering  the  sanctuary,  i.e.  the  dwelling  itself,  either  in  the  verse  before  us 
in  Ex.  xxxiii.  11. 


n; 


I 


CHAP.  XII.  4-10.  79 

D3S''33  ("  a  prophet  to  you  "),  as  it  is  in  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.^  and 
not  to  be  construed  with  the  words  which  follow  ("  /  Jehovah  will 
make  Myself  known'^).  The  position  of  Jehovah  at  the  head  of  the 
clause  without  a  preceding  ''^J6<  (I)  would  be  much  more  remark- 
able than  the  separation  of  the  dependent  noun  from  the  governing 
noun  by  the  suffix,  which  occurs  in  other  cases  also  {e.g.  Lev.  vi. 
3,  xxvi.  42,  etc.)  ;  moreover,  it  would  be  by  no  means  suited  to 
the  sense,  as  no  such  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  fact  that  it  was 
Jehovah  who  made  Himself  known,  as  to  require  or  even  justify 
such  a  construction.  The  "  whole  house  of  Jehovah  '*  (ver.  7)  is  not 
"primarily  His  dwelling,  the  holy  tent"  (Baumgarten), — for,  in 
that  case,  the  w^ord  "  whole  "  would  be  quite  superfluous, — but  the 
vrhole  house  of  Israel,  or  the  covenant  nation  regarded  as  a  kingdom, 
to  the  administration  and  government  of  which  Moses  had  been 
called :  as  a  matter  of  fact,  therefore,  the  whole  economy  of  the 
Old  Testament,  having  its  central  point  in  the  holy  tent,  which 
Jehovah  had  caused  to  be  built  as  the  dwelling-place  of  His  name. 
It  did  not  terminate,  however,  in  the  service  of  the  sanctuary,  as 
we  may  see  from  the  fact  that  God  did  not  make  the  priests  who 
were  entrusted  with  the  duties  of  the  sanctuary  the  organs  of  His 
saving  revelation,  but  raised  up  and  called  prophets  after  Moses 
for  that  purpose.  Compare  the  expression  in  Heb.  iii.  6,  "  Whose 
house  w^e  are."  |^K3  with  3  does  not  mean  to  be,  or  become,  en- 
trusted with  anything  {Baumgarten,  Knobel),  but  simply  to  be  last- 
ing, firm,  constant,  in  a  local  or  temporal  sense  (Deut.  xxviii.  59 ;  1 
Sam.  ii.  35  ;  2  Sam.  vii.  16,  etc.)  ;  in  a  historical  sense,  to  prove  or 
attest  one's  self  (Gen.  xlii.  20) ;  and  in  an  ethical  sense,  to  be  found 
proof,  trustworthy,  true  (Ps.  Ixxviii.  8  ;  1  Sam.  iii.  20,  xxii.  14 : 
see  Delitzsch  on  Heb.  iii.  2).  In  the  participle,  therefore,  it  signi- 
fies proved,  faithful,  itlgto^  (LXX.).  "  Mouth  to  mouth  "  answers 
to  the  "face  to  face"  in  Ex.  xxxiii.  11  (of.  Deut.  xxxiv.  10),  i.e. 
without  any  mediation  or  reserve,  but  with  the  same  closeness  and 
freedom  with  which  friends  converse  together  (Ex.  xxxiii.  11). 
This  is  still  further  strengthened  and  elucidated  by  the  words  in 
apposition,  'Hn  the  form  of  seeing  (appearance),  and  not  in  tiddles," 
i.e.  visibly,  and  not  in  a  dark,  hidden,  enigmatical  way.  •^^1'? 
is  an  accusative  defining  the  mode,  and  signifies  here  not  vision, 
as  in  ver.  6,  but  adspectus,  view,  sight ;  for  it  forms  an  antithesis 
to  "^^1^^  in  ver.  6.  "  The  form  (Eng.  similitude)  of  Jehovah  "  was 
not  the  essential  nature  of  God,  His  unveiled  glory, — for  this  no 
mortal  man  can  see  {yid.  Ex.  xxxiii.  18  sqq.), — but  a  form  which 


80  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  JIOSES. 

manifested  the  invisible  God  to  the  eye  of  man  in  a  clearly  dis- 
cernible mode,  and  which  was  essentially  different,  not  only  from 
the  visionary  sight  of  God  in  the  form  of  a  man  (Ezek.  i.  26 ;  Dan. 
vii.  9  and  13),  but  also  from  the  appearances  of  God  in  the  outward 
world  of  the  senses,  in  the  person  and  form  of  the  angel  of  Jehovah, 
and  stood  in  the  same  relation  to  these  two  forms  of  revelation,  so 
far  as  directness  and  clearness  were  concerned,  as  the  sight  of  a 
person  in  a  dream  to  that  of  the  actual  figure  of  the  person  himself. 
God  talked  with  Moses  without  figure,  in  the  clear  distinctness  of  a 
spiritual  communication,  whereas  to  the  prophets  He  only  revealed 
Himself  through  the  medium  of  ecstasy  or  dream. 

Through  this  utterance  on  the  part  of  Jehovah,  Moses  is  placed 
above  all  the  prophets,  in  relation  to  God  and  also  to  the  whole 
nation.  The  divine  revelation  to  the  prophets  is  thereby  restricted 
to  the  two  forms  of  inward  intuition  (vision  and  dream).  It  fol- 
lows from  this,  that  it  had  always  a  visionary  character,  though  it 
might  vary  in  intensity ;  and  therefore  that  it  had  always  more  or 
less  obscurity  about  it,  because  the  clearness  of  self-consciousness 
and  the  distinct  perception  of  an  external  world,  both  receded 
before  the  inward  intuition,  in  a  dream  as  well  as  in  a  vision.  The 
prophets  were  consequently  simply  organs,  through  whom  Jehovah 
made  known  His  counsel  and  will  at  certain  times,  and  in  relation 
to  special  circumstances  and  features  in  the  development  of  His 
kingdom.  It  was  not  so  with  Moses.  Jehovah  had  placed  him 
over  all  His  house,  had  called  him  to  be  the  founder  and  organizer 
of  the  kingdom  established  in  Israel  through  his  mediatorial  service, 
and  had  found  him  faithful  in  His  service.  With  this  servant 
(Oepdwcov,  LXX.)  of  His,  He  spake  mouth  to  mouth,  without  a 
figure  or  figurative  cloak,  with  the  distinctness  of  a  human  inter- 
change of  thought ;  so  that  at  any  time  he  could  inquire  of  God 
and  wait  for  the  divine  reply.  Hence  Moses  was  not  a  prophet  of 
Jehovah,  like  many  others,  not  even  merely  the  first  and  highest 
prophet,  primus  inter  pares,  but  stood  above  all  the  prophets,  as  the 
founder  of  the  theocracy,  and  mediator  of  the  Old  Covenant.  Upon 
this  unparalleled  relation  of  Moses  to  God  and  the  theocracy,  so 
clearly  expressed  in  the  verses  before  us,  the  Kabbins  have  justly 
founded  their  view  as  to  the  higher  grade  of  inspiration  in  the 
TJiorah.  This  view  is  fully  confirmed  through  the  history  of  the 
Old  Testament  kingdom  of  God,  and  the  relation  in  which  the 
writings  of  the  prophets  stand  to  those  of  Moses.  The  prophets 
subsequent  to  Moses  simply  continued  to  build  upon  the  foundation 


CHAP.  XII.  11-16.  81 

which  Moses  laid.  And  if  Moses  stood  in  this  unparalleled  relation 
to  the  Lord,  Miriam  and  Aaron  sinned  grievously  against  him, 
when  speaking  as  they  did.  Ver.  9.  After  this  address,  "  the  wrath 
of  Jehovah  burned  against  them,  and  He  went^  As  a  judge,  with- 
drawing from  the  judgment-seat  when  he  has  pronounced  his  sen- 
tence, so  Jehovah  went,  by  the  cloud  in  which  He  had  come  down 
w^ithdrawing  from  the  tabernacle,  and  ascending  up  on  high.  And 
at  the  same  moment,  Miriam,  the  instigator  of  the  rebellion  against 
her  brother  Moses,  was  covered  with  leprosy,  and  became  white  as 
snow. 

Vers.  11-16.  When  Aaron  saw  his  sister  smitten  in  this  way, 
he  said  to  Moses,  "  Alas  !  my  lord,  I  beseech  thee,  lay  not  this  sin 
upon  us,  for  loe  have  done  foolishly  ;"  i.e.  let  us  not  bear  its  punish- 
ment. "  Let  her  (^Miriam)  not  he  as  the  dead  thing,  on  ivhose  coming 
out  of  its  mother  s  womb  half  its  flesh  is  consumed ;"  i.e.  like  a  still- 
born child,  which  comes  into  the  w^orld  half  decomposed.  His  reason 
for  making  this  comparison  was,  that  leprosy  produces  decomposi- 
tion in  the  living  body. — ^Ver.  13.  Moses,  with  his  mildness,  took 
compassion  upon  his  sister,  upon  whom  this  punishment  had  fallen, 
and  cried  to  the  Lord,  "  0  God,  I  beseech  Thee,  heal  her."  The 
connection  of  the  particle  fcO  with  76?  is  certainly  unusual,  but  yet 
it  is  analogous  to  the  construction  with  such  exclamations  as  ""^fc? 
(Jer.  iv.  31,  xlv.  3)  and  t^pj}  (Gen.  xii.  11,  xvi.  2,  etc.) ;  since  ^^  in 
the  vocative  is  to  be  regarded  as  equivalent  to  an  exclamation ; 
whereas  the  alteration  into  7^,  as  proposed  by  J.  D.  Michaelis  and 
Knobel,  does  not  even  give  a  fitting  sense,  apart  altogether  from  the 
fact,  that  the  repetition  of  t^J  after  the  verb,  with  ^  ?^  before  it, 
would  be  altogether  unexampled. — Vers.  14,  15.  Jehovah  hearkened 
to  His  servant's  prayer,  though  not  without  inflicting  deep  humilia- 
tion upon  Miriam.  "  If  her  father  had  but  spit  in  her  face,  would 
she  not  be  ashamed  seven  days?"  i.e.  keep  herself  hidden  from  Me 
out  of  pure  shame.  She  was  to  be  shut  outside  the  camp,  to  be 
excluded  from  the  congregation  as  a  leprous  person  for  seven  days, 
and  then  to  be  received  in  again.  Thus  restoration  and  purification 
from  her  leprosy  were  promised  to  her  after  the  endurance  of  seven 
days'  punishment.  Leprosy  was  the  just  punishment  for  her  sin. 
In  her  haughty  exaggeration  of  the  worth  of  her  own  prophetic 
gift,  she  had  placed  herself  on  a  par  with  Moses,  the  divinely  ap- 
pointed head  of  the  whole  nation,  and  exalted  herself  above  the 
congregation  of  the  Lord.  For  this  she  was  afflicted  with  a  disease 
which  shut  her  out  of  the  number  of  the  members  of  the  people  of 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  F 


82  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

God,  and  thus  actually  excluded  from  the  camp ;  so  that  she  could 
only  be  received  back  again  after  she  had  been  healed,  and  by  a 
formal  purification.  The  latter  followed  as  a  matter  of  course,  from 
Lev.  xiii.  and  xiv.,  and  did  not  need  to  be  specially  referred  to  here. 
— Vers.  15hj  16.  The  people  did  not  proceed  any  farther  till  the 
restoration  of  Miriam.  After  this  they  departed  from  Hazeroth, 
and  encamped  in  the  desert  of  Paran,  namely  at  Kadesh,  on  the 
southern  boundary  of  Canaan.  This  is  evident  from  chap,  xiii., 
more  especially  ver.  26,  as  compared  with  Deut.  i.  19  sqq.,  where 
it  is  stated  not  merely  that  the  spies,  who  were  sent  out  from  this 
place  of  encampment  to  Canaan,  returned  to  the  congregation  at 
Kadesh,  but  that  they  set  out  from  Kadesh-Barnea  for  Canaan, 
because  there  the  Israelites  had  come  to  the  mountains  of  the 
Amorites,  which  God  had  promised  them  for  an  inheritance. 

With  regard  to  the  situation  of  Kadesh,  it  has  already  been 
observed  at  Gen.  xiv.  7,  that  it  is  probably  to  be  sought  for  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  fountain  of  A  in  Kades,  which  was  discovered 
by  Rowland,  to  the  south  of  Bir  Seba  and  Khalasa,  on  the  heights 
of  Jebel  Helal,  i.e,  at  the  north-west  comer  of  the  mountain  land 
of  Azazimeh,  which  is  more  closely  described  at  chap.  x.  12  (see  pp. 
57,  58),  where  the  western  slopes  of  this  highland  region  sink  gently 
down  into  the  undulating  surface  of  the  desert,  which  stretches 
thence  to  El  Arish,  with  a  breadth  of  about  six  hours'  journey,  and 
keeps  the  way  open  between  Arabia  Petrsea  and  the  south  of  Pales- 
tine. "  In  the  northern  third  of  this  western  slope,  the  mountains 
recede  so  as  to  leave  a  free  space  for  a  plain  of  about  an  hour's 
journey  in  breadth,  which  comes  towards  the  east,  and  to  which 
access  is  obtained  through  one  or  more  of  the  larger  wadys  that  are 
to  be  seen  here  (such  as  Ketemat,  Kusaimeh,  el  Ain,  Muweileh)." 
At  the  north-eastern  background  of  this  plain,  which  forms  almost 
a  rectangular  figure  of  nine  miles  by  five,  or  ten  by  six,  stretching 
from  west  to  east,  large  enough  to  receive  the  camp  of  a  wandering 
people,  and  about  twelve  miles  to  the  E.S.E.  of  Muweileh,  there 
rises,  like  a  large  solitary  mass,  at  the  edge  of  the  mountains  which 
run  on  towards  the  north,  a  bare  rock,  at  the  foot  of  which  there  is 
a  copious  spring,  falling  in  ornamental  cascades  into  the  bed  of  a 
brook,  which  is  lost  in  the  sand  about  300  or  400  yards  to  the  west. 
This  place  still  bears  the  ancient  name  of  Kudes,  There  can  be 
no  doubt  as  to  the  identity  of  this  Kudes  and  the  biblical  Kadesh. 
The  situation  agrees  with  all  the  statements  in  the  Bible  concerniniij 
Kadesh :  for  example,  that  Israel  had  then  reached  the  border  of  the 


CHAP.  XIII.  XIV.  83 

promised  land  ;  also  that  the  spies  who  were  sent  out  from  Kadesli 
returned  thither  by  coming  from  Plebron  to  the  wilderness  of  Paran 
(chap.  xiii.  26) ;  and  lastly,  according  to  the  assertions  of  the 
Bedouins,  as  quoted  by  Rowland,  this  Kudes  was  ten  or  eleven 
days'  journey  from  Sinai  (in  perfect  harmony  with  Deut.  i.  2),  and 
was  connected  by  passable  wadys  with  Mount  Hor.  The  Israelites 
proceeded,  no  doubt,  through  the  wady  Retemat,  i.e.  Rithmah  (see 
at  chap,  xxxiii.  18),  into  the  plain  of  Kadesh.  (On  the  town  of 
Kadesh,  see  at  chap.  xx.  16.)^ 

SPIES  SENT  OUT.      MURMURING  OF  THE  PEOPLE,  AND  THEIR 
PUNISHMENT. — CHAP.  XIII.  AJJD  XlV. 

When  they  had  arrived  at  Kadesh,  in  the  desert  of  Paran  (chap, 
xiii.  26),  Moses  sent  out  spies  by  the  command  of  God,  and  accord- 
ing to  the  wishes  of  the  people,  to  explore  the  way  by  which  they 
could  enter  into  Canaan,  and  also  the  nature  of  the  land,  of  its 
cities,  and  of  its  population  (chap.  xiii.  1-20).  The  men  who  were 
sent  out  passed  through  the  land,  from  the  south  to  the  northern 
frontier,  and  on  their  return  reported  that  the  land  was  no  doubt 
one  of  pre-eminent  goodness,  but  that  it  was  inhabited  by  a  strong 
people,  who  had  giants  among  them,  and  were  in  possession  of  very 
large  fortified  towns  (vers.  21-29)  ;  whereupon  Caleb  declared  that  it 
was  quite  possible  to  conquer  it,  whilst  the  others  despaired  of  over 
coming  the  Canaanites,  and  spread  an  evil  report  among  the  people 
concerning  the  land  (vers.  30-33).  The  congregation  then  raised 
a  loud  lamentation,  and  went  so  far  in  their  murmuring  against 
Moses  and  Aaron,  as  to  speak  without  reserve  or  secrecy  of  depos- 
ing Moses,  and  returning  to  Egypt  under  another  leader :  they  even 
wanted  to  stone  Joshua  and  Caleb,  who  tried  to  calm  the  excited 
multitude,  and  urged  them  to  trust  in  the  Lord.  But  suddenly  the 
glory  of  the  Lord  interposed  with  a  special  manifestation  of  judg- 
ment (chap.  xiv.  1-10).  Jehovah  made  known  to  Moses  His  reso- 
lution to  destroy  the  rebellious  nation,  but  suffered  Himself  to  be 
moved  by  the  intercession  of  Moses  so  far  as  to  promise  that  He 
would  preserve  the  nation,  though  He  would  exclude  the  murmur- 
ing multitude  from  the  promised  land  (vers.  11-25).  He  then 
directed  Moses  and  Aaron  to  proclaim  to  the  people  the  following 

'  See  Kurtz,  History  of  the  Old  Covenent,  vol.  iii.  p.  225,  where  the  current 
notion,  that  Kadesh  was  situated  on  the  western  border  of  the  Arabah,  below 
the  Dead  Sea,  by  either  Ain  Hash  or  Ain  el  Weibeh,  is  successfully  refuted. 


84 


THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


punishment  for  their  repeated  rebelHon  :  that  they  should  bear  their 
iniquity  for  forty  years  in  the  wilderness ;  that  the  whole  nation 
that  had  come  out  of  Egypt  should  die  there,  with  the  exception  of 
Caleb  and  Joshua ;  and  that  only  their  children  should  enter  the 
promised  land  (vers.  26-39).  The  people  were  shocked  at  this 
announcement,  and  resolved  to  force  a  way  into  Canaan ;  but,  as 
Moses  predicted,  they  were  beaten  by  the  Canaanites  and  Amalekites, 
and  driven  back  to  Hormah  (vers.  40-45).^ 

These  events  form  a  grand  turning-point  in  the  history  of  Israel, 
in  which  the  whole  of  the  future  history  of  the  covenant  nation  is 
typically  reflected.  The  constantly  repeated  unfaithfulness  of  the- 
nation  could  not  destroy  the  faithfulness  of  God,  or  alter  His  pur- 
poses of  salvation.  In  wrath  Jehovah  remembered  mercy ;  through 
judgment  He  carried  out  His  plan  of  salvation,  that  all  the  world 
might  know  that  no  flesh  was  righteous  before  Him,  and  that  the  un- 
belief and  unfaithfulness  of  men  could  not  overturn  the  truth  of  God. 


Chap.  xiii.  1-20.  Despatch  of  the  Spies  to  Canaan. — 
Vers.  1  sqq.  The  command  of  Jehovah,  to  send  out  men  to  spy  out 
the  land  of  Canaan,  was  occasioned,  according  to  the  account  given 
by  Moses  in  Deut.  i.  22  sqq.,  by  a  proposal  of  the  congregation, 
which  pleased  Moses,  so  that  he  laid  the  matter  before  the  Lord, 
who  then  commanded  him  to  send  out  for  this  purpose,  "  of  every 
tribe  of  their  fathers  a  mariy  every  one  a  ruler  among  them,  i.e.  none_ 

^  According  to  Knobel,  the  account  of  these  events  arose  from  two  or  three 
documents  interwoven  with  one  another  in  the  following  manner :  chap.  xiii. 
l-17a,  21,  25,  26,  32,  and  xiv.  2a,  5-7,  107a  36-38,  was  written  by  the  Elo- 
hist,  the  remainder  by  the  Jehovist, — chap.  xiii.  22-24,  27-31,  xiv.  16,  11-25, 
39-45,  being  taken  from  his  first  document,  and  chap.  xiii.  17&-20,  xiv.  26-4, 
8-lOa,  26-33,  35,  from  his  second  ;  whilst,  lastly,  chap.  xiii.  33,  and  the  com- 
mencement of  chap.  xiv.  1,  were  added  from  his  own  resources,  because  it  con- 
tains contradictory  statements.  "  According  to  the  Elohist,"  says  this  critic, 
"  the  spies  went  through  the  whole  land  (chap.  xiii.  32,  xiv.  7),  and  penetrated 
even  to  the  north  of  the  country  (chap.  xiii.  21)  :  they  took  forty  days  to  this 
(chap.  xiii.  25,  xiv.  34)  ;  they  had  among  them  Joshua,  whose  name  was  altered 
at  that  time  (chap.  xiii.  16),  and  who  behaved  as  bravely  as  Caleb  (chap.  xiii.  8, 
xiv.  6,  38).  According  to  the  Jehovistic  completion,  the  spies  did  not  go 
through  the  whole  land,  but  only  entered  into  it  (chap.  xiii.  27),  merely  going 
into  the  neighbourhood  of  Hebron,  in  the  south  country  (chap.  xiii.  22,  23)  ; 
there  they  saw  the  gigantic  Anakites  (chap.  xiii.  22,  28,  33),  cut  off  the  large 
bunch  of  grapes  in  the  valley  of  Eshcol  (chap.  xiii.  23,  24),  and  then  came 
back  to  Moses.  Caleb  was  the  only  one  who  showed  himself  courageous,  and 
Joshua  was  not  with  them  at  all  (chap.  xiii.  30,  xiv.  24)."    But  these  discre- 


CHAP.  XIII.  1-20.  85 

but  men  who  were  princes  in  their  tribes,  who  held  the  prominent 
position  of  princes,  i.e.  distinguished  persons  of  rank ;  or,  as  it  is 
stated  in  ver.  3,  " heads  of  the  children  of  Israel"  i.e.  not  the  tribe- 
princes  of  the  twelve  tribes,  but  those  men,  out  of  the  total  number 
of  the  heads  of  the  tribes  and  families  of  Israel,  who  were  the  most 
suitable  for  such  a  mission,  though  the  selection  was  to  be  made  in 
such  a  manner  that  every  tribe  should  be  represented  by  one  of  its 
own  chiefs.  That  there  were  none  of  the  twelve  tribe-princes 
among  them  is  apparent  from  a  comparison  of  their  names  (vers. 
4-15)  with  the  (totally  different)  names  of  the  tribe-princes  (chap, 
i.  3  sqq.,  vii.  12  sqq.).  Caleb  and  Joshua  are  the  only  spies  that 
are  known.  The  order,  in  which  the  tribes  are  placed  in  the  list  of 
the  names  in  vers.  4-15,  differs  from  that  in  chap.  i.  5-15  only  in 
the  fact  that  in  ver.  10  Zebulun  is  separated  from  the  other  sons  of 
Leah,  and  in  ver.  11  Manasseh  is  separated  from  Ephraim.  The 
expression  "o/  the  tribe  of  Joseph/^  in  ver.  11,  stands  for  "of  the 
children  of  Joseph,"  in  chap.  i.  10,  xxxiv.  23.  At  the  close  of  the 
list  it  is  still  further  stated,  that  Moses  called  Hoshea  (i.e.  help),  the 
son  of  Nun,  Jehoshua,  contracted  into  Joshua  (i.e.  Jehovah-help, 
equivalent  to,  whose  help  is  Jehovah).  This  statement  does  not 
present  any  such  discrepancy,  when  compared  with  Ex.  xvii.  9,  13, 
xxiv.  13,  xxxii.  17,  xxxiii.  11,  and  Num.  xi.  28,  where  Joshua  bears 
this  name  as  the  servant  of  Moses  at  a  still  earlier  period,  as  to  point 
to  any  diversity  of  authorship.     As  there  is  nothing  of  a  genea- 

pancies  do  not  exist  in  the  biblical  narrative  ;  on  the  contrary,  they  have  been 
introduced  by  the  critic  himself,  by  the  forcible  separation  of  passages  from 
their  context,  and  by  arbitrary  interpolations.  The  words  of  the  spies  in  chap, 
xiii.  27,  "We  came  into  the  land  whither  thou  sen  test  us,  and  surely  it  floweth 
with  milk  and  honey,"  do  not  imply  that  they  only  came  into  the  southern 
portion  of  the  land,  any  more  than  the  fact  that  they  brought  a  bunch  of 
grapes  from  the  neighbourhood  of  Hebron  is  a  proof  that  they  did  not  go 
beyond  the  valley  of  Eshcol.  Moreover,  it  is  not  stated  in  chap.  xiii.  30  that 
Joshua  was  not  found  among  the  tribes.  Again,  the  circumstance  that  in  chap, 
xiv.  11-25  and  26-35  the  same  thing  is  said  twice  over, — the  special  instructions 
as  to  the  survey  of  the  land  in  chap.  xiii.  17&-20,  which  were  quite  unnecessary 
for  intelligent  leaders, — ^the  swearing  of  God  (chap.  xiv.  16,  21,  23), — the  forced 
explanation  of  the  name  Eshcol,  in  chap.  xiii.  24,  and  other  things  of  the  same 
kind, — are  said  to  furnish  further  proofs  of  the  interpolation  of  Jehovistic  clauses 
into  the  Elohistic  narrative  ;  and  lastly,  a  number  of  the  words  employed  are 
supposed  to  place  this  beyond  all  doubt.  Of  these  proofs,  however,  the  first  rests 
upon  a  simple  misinterpretation  of  the  passage  in  question,  and  a  disregard  of 
the  peculiarities  of  Hebrew  history ;  whilst  the  rest  are  either  subjective  conclu- 
sions, dictated  by  the  taste  of  vulgar  rationalism,  or  inferences  and  assump- 
tions, of  which  the  tenability  and  force  need  first  of  all  to  be  established. 


86  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

logical  character  in  any  of  these  passages,  so  as  to  warrant  us  in 
expecting  to  find  the  family  name  of  Joshua  in  them,  the  name 
Joshua,  by  which  Hosea  had  become  best  known  in  history,  could 
be  used  proleptically  in  them  all.     On  the  other  hand,  however,  it 
is  not  distinctly  stated  in  the  verse  before  us,  that  this  was  the 
occasion  on  which  Moses  gave  Hosea  the  new  name  of  Joshua.    As 
the  Vav  consec,  frequently  points  out  merely  the  order  of  thought, 
the  words  may  be  understood  without  hesitation  in  the  following 
sense  :  These  are  the  names  borne  by  the  heads  of  the  tribes  to  be 
sent  out  as  spies,  as  they  stand  in  the  family  registers  according  to 
their  descent ;  Hosea,  however,  was  named  Joshua  by  Moses ;  which 
would  not  by  any  means  imply  that  the  alteration  in  the  name  had 
not  been  made  till  then.     It  is  very  probable  that  Moses  may  have 
given  him  the  new  name  either  before  or  after  the  defeat  of  the 
Amalekites  (Ex.  xvii.  9  sqq.),  or  when  he  took  him  into  his  service, 
though  it  has  not  been  mentioned  before  ;  whilst  here  the  circum- 
stances themselves  required  that  it  should  be  stated  that  Hosea,  as 
he  was  called  in  the  list  prepared  and  entered  in  the  documentary 
record  according  to  the  genealogical  tables  of  the  tribes,  had  re- 
ceived from  Moses  the  name  of  Joshua.     In  vers.  17-20  Moses 
gives  them  the  necessary  instructions,  defining  more   clearly  the 
motive  which  the  congregation  had  assigned  for  sending  them  out, 
namely,  that  they  might  search  out  the  way  into  the  land  and  to  its 
towns  (Deut.  i.  22).     "  Get  you  up  there  (HT)  in  the  south  country, 
and  go  up  to  the  mountain"     Negeb,  i.e.  south  country,  lit.  dryness, 
aridity,  from  njJ,  to  be  dry  or  arid  (in  Syr.,  Chald.,  and  Samar.). 
Hence  the  dry,  parched  land,  in  contrast  to  the  well-watered  country 
(Josh.  XV.  19 ;  Judg.  i.  15),  was  the  name  given  to  the  southern 
district  of  Canaan,  which  forms  the  transition  from  the  desert  to 
the  strictly  cultivated  land,  and  bears  for  the  most  part  the  character 
of  a  steppe,  in  which  tracts  of  sand  and  heath  are  intermixed  with 
shrubs,  grass,  and  vegetables,  whilst  here  and  there  corn  is  also 
cultivated ;  a  district  therefore  which  was  better  fitted  for  ^rrazin^ 
than  for  agriculture,  though  it  contained  a  number  of  towns  and 
villages  (see  at  Josh.  xv.  21-32).     "  The  mountain''  is  the  moun- 
tainous part  of  Palestine,  which  was  inhabited  by  Hittites,  Jebusites, 
and  Amorites  (ver.  29),  and  was  called  the  mountains  of  the  Amo- 
rites,  on  account  of  their  being  the  strongest  of  the  Canaanitish 
tribes  (Deut.  i.  7,  19  sqq.).     It  is  not  to  be 'restricted,  as  Knohel 
supposes,  to  the  limits  of  the  so-called  mountains  of  Judah  (Josh. 
XV.  48-62),  but  included  the  mountains  of  Israel  or  Ephraim  also 


i 


CHAP.  XIII.  21-33.  87 

(Josh.  xi.  21,  XX.,  7),  and  formed,  according  to  Deut.  i.  7,  the  back- 
bone of  the  whole  land  of  Canaan  up  to  Lebanon. — Ver.  18.  They 
were  to  see  the  land,  "  what  it  was,"  i.e.  what  w^as  its  character,  and 
the  people  that  dwelt  in  it,  whether  they  were  strong,  i.e.  courage- 
ous and  brave,  or  weak,  i.e.  spiritless  and  timid,  and  whether  they 
were  little  or  great,  i.e.  numerically ;  (ver.  19)  what  the  land  w^as, 
whether  good  or  bad,  sc.  with  regard  to  climate  and  cultivation, 
and  whether  the  towns  were  camps,  i.e.  open  villages  and  hamlets, 
or  fortified  places ;  also  (ver.  20)  whether  the  land  was  fat  or  lean, 
i.e.  whether  it  had  a  fertile  soil  or  not,  and  whether  there  were  trees 
in  it  or  not.  All  this  they  were  to  search  out  courageously  (P^nnn^ 
to  show  one's  self  courageous  in  any  occupation),  and  to  fetch  (some) 
of  the  fruits  of  the  land,  as  it  was  the  time  of  the  first-ripe  grapes. 
In  Palestine  the  first  grapes  ripen  as  early  as  August,  and  sometimes 
even  in  July  (vid.  Robinson,  ii.  100,  ii.  611),  whilst  the  vintage 
takes  place  in  September  and  October. 

Vers.  21-33.  Journey  of  the  Spies  ;  their  Return,  and 
Report. — Yer.  21.  In  accordance  with  the  instructions  they  had 
received,  the  men  who  had  been  sent  out  passed  through  the  land, 
from  the  desert  of  Zin  to  Rehob,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Hamath, 
i.e.  in  its  entire  extent  from  south  to  north.  The  "  Desert  of  Zin^^ 
(which  occurs  not  only  here,  but  in  chap.  xx.  1,  xxvii.  14,  xxxiii. 
36,  xxxiv.  3,  4 ;  Deut.  xxxii.  51,  and  Josh.  xv.  1,  3)  was  the  name 
given  to  the  northern  edge  of  the  great  desert  of  Paran,  viz.  the 
broad  ravine  of  Wady  Murreh  (see  p.  59),  which  separates  the 
lofty  and  precipitous  northern  border  of  the  table-land  of  the 
Azazimeh  from  the  southern  border  of  the  Rakhma  plateau,  i.e. 
of  tlie  southernmost  plateau  of  the  mountains  of  the  Amorites  (or 
the  mountains  of  Judah),  and  runs  from  Jebel  Madarah  {Moddera) 
on  the  east,  to  the  plain  of  Kadesh,  which  forms  part  of  the  desert 
of  Zin  (cf.  chap,  xxvii.  14,  xxxiii.  36  ;  Deut.  xxxii.  51),  on  the  west. 
The  south  frontier  of  Canaan  passed  through  this  from  the  southern 
end  of  the  Dead  Sea,  along  the  Wady  el  Murreh  to  the  Wady  el 
ArisJi  (chap,  xxxiv.  3). — "  Rehob,  to  come  (coming)  to  Hamath,^'  i.e. 
where  you  enter  the  province  of  Hamath,  on  the  northern  boundary- 
of  Canaan,  is  hardly  one  of  the  two  Rehobs  in  the  tribe  of  Asher 
(Josh.  xix.  28  and  30),  but  most  likely  Beth-Rehob  in  the  tribe  of 
Naphtali,  which  was  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Dan  Lais,  the  modern 
Tell  el  Kadhy  (Judg.  xviii.  28),  and  which  Robinson  imagined  that 
he  had  identified  in  the  ruins  of  the  castle  of  Hunin  or  Honin,  in 


88  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  village  of  the  same  namej  to  the  south-west  of  Tell  el  KadJiy^ 
on  the  range  of  mountains  which  bound  the  plain  towards  the  west 
above  Lake  Huleh  (Bibl.  Kesearches^  p.  371).  In  support  of  this 
conjecture,  he  laid  the  principal  stress  upon  the  fact  that  the  direct 
road  to  Hamath  through  the  Wady  et  Teim  and  the  Bekaa  com- 
mences here.  The  only  circumstance  which  it  is  hard  to  reconcile 
with  this  conjecture  is,  that  Beth-Eehob  is  never  mentioned  in  the 
Old  Testament,  with  the  exception  of  Judg.  xviii.  28,  either  among 
the  fortified  towns  of  the  Ganaanites  or  in  the  wars  of  the  Israelites 
with  the  Syrians  and  Assyrians,  and  therefore  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  a  place  of  such  importance  as  we  should  naturally  be  led 
to  suppose  from  the  character  of  this  castle,  the  yqyj  situation  of 
which  points  to  a  bold,  commanding  fortress  (see  Lynch's  Expedi- 
tion), and  where  there  are  still  remains  of  its  original  foundations 
built  of  large  square  stones,  hew^n  and  grooved,  and  reminding  one 
of  the  antique  and  ornamental  edifices  of  Solomon's  times  (cf. 
'  Ritter,  Erdkunde,  xv.  pp.  242  sqq.). — Hamath  is  Epiphania  on  the 
Orontes,  now  Hamah  (see  at  Gen.  x.  18). 

After  the  general  statement,  that  the  spies  went  through  the 
whole  land  from  the  southern  to  the  northern  frontier,  two  facts  are 
mentioned  in  vers.  22-24,  which  occurred  in  connection  with  their 
mission,  and  were  of  great  importance  to  the  whole  congregation. 
These  single  incidents  are  linked  on,  however,  in  a  truly  Hebrew 
style,  to  what  precedes,  viz.  by  an  imperfect  with  Vav  consec,  just 
in  the  same  manner  in  which,  in  1  Kings  vi.  9,  15,  the  detailed 
account  of  the  building  of  the  temple  is  linked  on  to  the  previous 
statement,  that  Solomon  built  the  temple  and  finished  it ;  -^  so  that 
the  true  rendering  would  be,  "now  they  ascended  in  the  south 
country  and  came  to  Hebron  (^*^*1  is  apparently  an  error  in  writing 
for  l^^Jl),  and  there  were  p^VJJ  "^y^],  the  children  of  Anak,"  three 
of  whom  are  mentioned  by  name.  These  three,  who  were  after- 
wards expelled  by  Caleb,  when  the  land  was  divided  and  the  city 
of  Hebron  was  given  to  him  for  an  inheritance  (Josh.  xv.   14; 

^  A  comparison  of  1  Kings  vi.,  where  we  cannot  possibly  suppose  that  two 
accounts  have  been  linked  together  or  interwoven,  is  specially  adapted  to  give 
us  a  clear  view  of  the  peculiar  custom  adopted  by  the  Hebrew  historians,  of 
placing  the  end  and  ultimate  result  of  the  events  they  narrate  as  much  as 
possible  at  the  head  of  their  narrative,  and  then  proceeding  with  a  minute 
account  of  the  more  important  of  the  attendant  circumstances,  without  paying 
any  regard  to  the  chronological  order  of  the  different  incidents,  or  being  at  all 
afraid  of  repetitions,  and  so  to  prove  how  unwarrantable  and  false  are  the 
conclusions  of  those  critics  who  press  such  passages  into  the  support  of  their 


I 


I 


CHAP.  XIII.  21-33.  89 

Judg.  i.  20),  were  descendants  of  Arhah,  the  lord  of  Hebron,  from 
whom  the  city  received  its  name  of  Kirjath-Arhah,  or  city  of 
Arbah,  and  who  is  described  in  Josh.  xiv.  15  as  "  the  great  {i,e. 
the  greatest)  man  among  the  Anakim,"  and  in  Josh.  xv.  13  as  the 
'•  father  of  Anak,"  Le.  the  founder  of  the  Anakite  family  there. 
For  it  is  evident  enough  that  \>y^_'^  {Anak)  is  not  the  proper  name 
of  a  man  in  these  passages,  but  the  name  of  a  family  or  tribe,  from 
the  fact  that  in  ver.  33,  where  Anak's  sons  are  spoken  of  in  a 
general  and  indefinite  manner,  PJV  V.r^  has  not  the  article ;  also  from 
the  fact  that  the  three  Anakites  who  lived  in  Hebron  are  almost 
always  called  \>}Vp^  ''Tr'o  Anak's  born  (vers.  22,  28),  and  that  py^r[  ^J3 
(sons  of  Anak),  in  Josh.  xv.  14,  is  still  further  defined  by  the 
phrase  P^VJ]  *'yh\  (children  of  Anak)  ;  and  lastly,  from  the  fact  that 
in  the  place  of  "  sons  of  Anak,"  we  find  "  sons  of  the  Anakim ''  in 
Deut.  i.  28  and  ix.  2,  and  the  "Anakim"  in  Deut.  ii.  10,  xi.  21  ; 
Josh.  xiv.  12,  etc.  Anak  is  supposed  to  signify  long-necked ;  but 
this  does  not  preclude  the  possibility  of  the  founder  of  the  tribe 
having  borne  this  name.  The  origin  of  the  Anakites  is  involved  in 
obscurity.  In  Deut.  ii.  10,  11,  they  are  classed  with  the  Emim 
and  JRephaim  on  account  of  their  gigantic  stature,  and  probably 
reckoned  as  belonging  to  the  pre-Canaanitish  inhabitants  of  the 
land,  of  whom  it  is  impossible  to  decide  whether  they  were  of  Semitic 
origin  or  descendants  of  Ham  (see  vol.  i.  p.  203).  It  is  also  doubt- 
ful, whether  the  names  found  here  in  vers.  21,  28,  and  in  Josh. 
XV.  14,  are  the  names  of  individuals,  Le,  of  chiefs  of  the  Anakites, 
or  the  names  of  Anakite  tribes.  The  latter  supposition  is  favoured 
by  the  circumstance,  that  the  same  names  occur  even  after  the 
capture  of  Hebron  by  Caleb,  or  at  least  fifty  years  after  the 
event  referred  to  here.  With  regard  to  Hebron,  it  is  still  further 
observed  in  ver.  225,  that  it  was  built  seven  years  before  Zoan  in 
Egypt.  Zoan — the  Tanis  of  the  Greeks  and  Komans,  the  San  of 
the  Arabs,  which  is  called  Jani,  Jane  in  Coptic  writings — was 
situated  upon  the  eastern  side  of  the  Tanitic  arm  of  the  Nile,  not 

hypotheses.  We  have  a  similar  passage  in  Josh.  iv.  11  sqq.,  where,  after  re- 
lating that  when  all  the  people  had  gone  through  the  Jordan  the  priests  also 
passed  through  with  the  ark  of  the  covenant  (ver.  11),  the  historian  proceeds 
in  vers.  12,  13,  to  describe  the  crossing  of  the  two  tribes  and  a  half ;  and  an- 
other in  Judg.  XX.,  where,  at  the  very  commencement  (ver.  35),  the  issue  of 
the  whole  is  related,  viz.  the  defeat  of  the  Benjamites;  and  then  after  that 
there  is  a  minute  description  in  vers.  36-46  of  the  manner  in  which  it  was 
effected.  This  style  of  narrative  is  also  common  in  the  historical  works  of  the 
Arabs. 


90  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

far  from  its  mouth  (see  Ges.  Thes.  p.  1177),  and  was  the  residence 
of  Pharaoh  in  the  time  of  Moses  (see  vol.  ii.  p.  27).  The  date  of 
its  erection  is  unknown  ;  but  Hebron  was  in  existence  as  early  as 
Abraham's  time  (Gen.  xiii.  18,  xxiii.  2  sqq.). — Ver.  23.  The  spies 
also  came  into  the  valley  of  Eshcol,  where  they  gathered  pomegran- 
ates and  figs,  and  also  cut  down  a  vine-branch  with  grapes  upon  it, 
which  two  persons  carried  upon  a  pole,  most  likely  on  account  of  fll 
its  extraordinary  size.  Bunches  of  grapes  are  still  met  with  in 
Palestine,  weighing  as  much  as  eight,  ten,  or  twelve  pounds,  the 
grapes  themselves  being  as  large  as  our  smaller  plums  (cf.  Tohler  B 
jbenkbldtter,  pp.  Ill,  112).  The  grapes  of  Hebron  are  especially 
celebrated.  To  the  north  of  this  city,  on  the  way  to  Jerusalem, 
you  pass  through  a  valley  with  vineyards  on  the  hills  on  both  sides, 
containing  the  largest  and  finest  grapes  in  the  land,  and  with 
pomegranates,  figs,  and  other  fruits  in  great  profusion  (^Robinson, 
Palestine,  i.  316,  compared  with  i.  314  and  ii.  442).  This  valley  is 
supposed,  and  not  without  good  ground,  to  be  the  Eshcol  of  this 
chapter,  which  received  its  name  of  Eshcol  (cluster  of  grapes),  ac- 
cording to  ver.  24,  from  the  bunch  of  grapes  which  was  cut  down 
there  by  the  spies.  This  statement,  of  course,  applies  to  the 
Israelites,  and  would  therefore  still  hold  good,  even  if  the  conjec- 
ture were  a  well-founded  one,  that  this  valley  received  its  name 
originally  from  the  Eshcol  mentioned  in  Gen.  -xyv.  13,  24,  as  the 
terebinth  grove  did  from  Mamre  the  brother  of  Eshcol. 

Vers.  25  sqq.  In  forty  days  the  spies  returned  to  the  camp  at 
Kadesh  (see  at  chap.  xvi.  6),  and  reported  the  great  fertility  of  the 
land  (^^  it  floweth  with  milk  and  honey ^^  see  at  Ex.  iii.  8),  pointing, 
at  the  same  time,  to  the  fruit  they  had  brought  with  them ; 
'^  nevertheless,^^  they  added  (''3  DSi<,  "only  that"),  '^  the  people  he 
strong  that  dwell  in  the  land,  and  the  cities  are  fortified,  very  large : 
and,  moreover,  we  saw  the  children  of  Anak  thereP  Amalekites 
dwelt  in  the  south  (see  at  Gen.  xxxvi.  12) ;  Hittites,  Jebusites,  and 
Amorites  in  the  mountains  (see  at  Gen.  x.  15,  16) ;  and  Canaan- 
ites  by  the  (Mediterranean)  Sea  and  on  the  side  of  the  Jordan,  i.e. 
in  the  Arabah  or  Ghor  (see  at  Gen.  xiii.  7  and  x.  15—18). — ^Ver. 
30.  As  these  tidings  respecting  the  towns  and  inhabitants  of  Canaan 
were  of  a  character  to  excite  the  people,  Caleb  calmed  them  before 
Moses  by  saying,  "  We  will  go  up  and  take  it ;  for  we  shall  overcome 
itP  The  fact  that  Caleb  only  is  mentioned,  though,  according  to 
chap.  xiv.  6,  Joshua  also  stood  by  his  side,  may  be  explained  on  the 
simple  ground,  that  at  first  Caleb  was  the  only  one  to  speak  and 


CHAP.  XIV.  1-10.  91 

maintain  the  possibility  of  conquering  Canaan. — Ver.  31.  But  his 
companions  were  of  an  opposite  opinion,  and  declared  that  the 
people  in  Canaan  were  stronger  than  the  Israelites,  and  therefore 
it  was  impossible  to  go  up  to  it. — Ver.  32.  Thus  they  spread  an 
evil  report  of  the  land  among  the  Israelites,  by  exaggerating  the 
difficulties  of  the  conquest  in  their  unbelieving  despair,  and  describ- 
ing Canaan  as  a  land  which  "  ate  up  its  inhabitants,'^  Their  mean- 
ing certainly  was  not  "  that  the  wretched  inhabitants  were  worn 
out  by  the  laborious  task  of  cultivating  it,  or  that  the  land  was 
pestilential  on  account  of  the  inclemency  of  the  weather,  or  that 
the  cultivation  of  the  land  was  difficult,  and  attended  with  many 
evils,"  as  Calvin  maintains.  Their  only  wish  was  to  lay  stress  upon 
the  difficulties  and  dangers  connected  with  the  conquest  and  main- 
tenance of  the  land,  on  account  of  the  tribes  inhabiting  and  sur- 
rounding it :  the  land  was  an  apple  of  discord,  because  of  its 
fruitfulness  and  situation  ;  and  as  the  different  nations  strove  for  its 
possession,  its  inhabitants  wasted  away  (Cler.,  Ros.,  0,  v.  Gerlach), 
The  people,  they  added,  are  rii'HD  \ti»Ji<,  "  men  of  measures,''  i.e.  of 
tall  stature  (cf .  Isa.  xlv.  14),  "  and  there  we  saw  the  Nephilim,  i.e. 
primeval  tyrants  (see  at  Gen.  vi.  4),  AnaUs  sons,  giants  of  Nephilim, 
and  we  seemed  to  ourselves  and  to  them  as  small  as  grasshoppers  J' 

Chap.  xiv.  1-10.  Uproar  among  the  People. — Vers.  1-4. 
This  appalling  description  of  Canaan  had  so  depressing  an  influ- 
ence upon  the  whole  congregation  (cf .  Deut.  i.  28  :  they  "  made 
their  heart  melt,"  i.e.  threw  them  into  utter  despair),  that  they 
raised  a  loud  cry,  and  wept  in  the  night  in  consequence.  The 
whole  nation  murmured  against  Moses  and  Aaron  their  two 
leaders,  saying  "  Would  that  ice  had  died  in  Egypt  or  in  this  ivilder- 
ness  I  Why  will  Jehovah  bring  us  into  this  land,  to  fall  by  the 
sivord,  that  our  wives  and  our  children  should  become  a  prey  (be 
made  slaves  by  the  enemy ;  cf.  Deut.  i.  27,  28)  ?  Let  us  rather 
return  into  Egypt !  We  will  appoint  a  captain,  they  said  one  to 
another,  and  go  back  to  Egypt" — Vers.  5-9.  At  this  murmuring, 
which  was  growing  into  open  rebellion,  Moses  and  Aaron  fell  upon 
their  faces  before  the  whole  of  the  assembled  congregation,  namely, 
to  pour  out  their  distress  before  the  Lord,  and  move  Him  to  inter- 
pose ;  that  is  to  say,  after  they  had  made  an  unsuccessful  attempt, 
as  we  may  supply  from  Deut.  i.  29-31,  to  cheer  up  the  people,  by 
pointing  them  to  the  help  they  had  thus  far  received  from  God. 
"  In  such  distress,  nothing  remained  but  to  pour  out  their  desires 


92  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

before  God ;  offering  their  prayer  in  public,  however,  and  in  the 
sight  of  all  the  people,  in  the  hope  of  turning  their  minds" 
(Calvin).  Joshua  and  Caleb,  who  had  gone  with  the  others  to 
explore  the  land,  also  rent  their  clothes,  as  a  sign  of  their  deep  sl 
distress  at  the  rebellious  attitude  of  the  people  (see  at  Lev.  x.  6),  and 
tried  to  convince  them  of  the  goodness  and  glory  of  the  land  they 
had  travelled  through,  and  to  incite  them  to  trust  in  the  Lord. 
"  If  Jehovah  take  pleasure  in  us,^^  they  said,  "  He  will  bring  us  into 
this  land.  Only  rebel  not  ye  against  Jehovah^  neither  fear  ye  the 
people  of  the  land ;  for  they  are  our  food;"^  i.e.  we  can  and  shall 
swallow  them  up,  or  easily  destroy  them  (cf .  chap.  xxii.  4,  xxiv.  8 ; 
Deut.  vii.  16 ;  Ps.  xiv.  4),  "  Their  shadow  is  departed  from  them, 
and  Jehovah  is  with  us :  fear  them  not !  "  "  Their  shadow  "  is  the 
shelter  and  protection  of  God  (cf.  Ps.  xcio,  cxxi.  5).  The  shadow, 
which  defends  from  the  burning  heat  of  the  sun,  was  a  very  natural 
figure  in  the  sultry  East,  to  describe  defence  from  injury,  a  refuge 
from  danger  and  destruction  (Isa.  xxx.  2).  The  protection  of  God 
had  departed  from  the  Ganaanites,  because  God  had  determined  to 
destroy  them  when  the  measure  of  their  iniquity  was  full  (Gen. 
XV.  16 ;  cf.  Ex.  xxxiv.  24 ;  Lev.  xviii.  25,  xx.  23).  But  the 
excited  people  resolved  to  stone  them,  when  Jehovah  interposed 
with  His  judgment,  and  His  glory  appeared  in  the  tabernacle  to  all 
the  Israelites ;  that  is  to  say,  the  majesty  of  God  flashed  out  before 
the  eyes  of  the  people  in  a  light  which  suddenly  burst  forth  from 
the  tabernacle  (see  at  Ex.  xvi.  10). 

Vers.  11-25.  Inteecession  of  Moses. — Vers.  11, 12.  Jehovah 
resented  the  conduct  of  the  people  as  base  contempt  of  His  deit", 
and  as  utter  mistrust  of  Him,  notwithstanding  all  the  signs  which 
He  had  wrought  in  the  midst  of  the  nation  ;  and  declared  that  He 
would  smite  the  rebellious  people  with  pestilence,  and  destroy  them, 
and  make  of  Moses  a  greater  and  still  mightier  people.  This  was 
just  what  He  had  done  before,  when  the  rebellion  took  place  at 
Sinai  (Ex.  xxxii.  10).  But  Moses,  as  a  servant  who  was  faithful 
over  the  whole  house  of  God,  and  therefore  sought  not  his  own 
honour,  but  the  honour  of  his  God  alone,  stood  in  the  breach  on 
this  occasion  also  (Ps.  cvi.  23),  with  a  similar  intercessory  prayer  to 
that  which  he  had  presented  iiu  Horeb,  except  that  on  this  occasion 
he  pleaded  the  honour  of  God  among  the  heathen,  and  the  glorious 
revelation  of  the  divine  nature  with  which  he  had  been  favoured 
at  Sinai,  as  a  motive  for  sparing  the  rebellious  nation  (vers.  13-19 ; 


CHAP.  XIV.  11-25.  93 

cf.  Ex.  xxxii.  11—13,  and  xxxiv.  6,  7).  The  first  he  expressed  in 
these  words  (vers.  13  sqq.):  ''Not  only  have  the  Egyptians  heard  thai 
Thou  hast  brought  out  this  people  from  among  them  with  Thy  might; 
they  have  also  told  it  to  the  inhabitants  of  this  land.  They  (the 
Egyptians  and  the  other  nations)  have  heard  that  Thou,  Jehovah, 
art  in  the  midst  of  this  people;  that  Thou,  Jehovah,  appearest  eye 
to  eye,  and  Thy  cloud  stands  over  them,  and  Thou  goest  before  them 
in  a  pillar  of  cloud  by  day  and  a  pillar  of  fire  by  night.  Now,  if 
Thou  shouldst  slay  this  people  as  one  man,  the  nations  which  have 
heard  the  tidings  of  Thee  would  say.  Because  Jehovah  was  not  able 
to  bring  this  people  into  the  land  which  lie  sware  to  them.  He  has 
slain  them  in  the  desert."  In  that  case  God  would  be  regarded  by 
the  heathen  as  powerless,  and  His  honour  would  be  impaired  (cf. 
Deut.  xxxii.  27 ;  Josh.  vii.  9).  It  was  for  the  sake  of  His  own 
honour  that  God,  at  a  later  time,  did  not  allow  the  Israelites  to 
perish  in  exile  (cf.  Isa.  xlviii.  9,  11,  lii.  5;  Ezek.  xxxvi.  22,  23). — 
noijl  .  .  .  iiVOCn  (vers.  13,  14),  et  audierunt  et  dixerunt;  \  —  \  =  et — 
et,  both — and.  The  inhabitants  of  this  land  (ver.  13)  were  not 
merely  the  Arabians,  but,  according  to  Ex.  xv.  14  sqq.,  the  tribes 
dwelling  in  and  round  Arabia,  the  Philistines,  Edomites,  Moabites, 
and  Canaanites,  to  whom  the  tidings  had  been  brought  of  the 
miracles  of  God  in  Egypt  and  at  the  Dead  Sea.  lyoK^,  in  ver.  14, 
can  neither  stand  for  "W^  ''3  (dixerunt)  se  audivisse,  nor  for  "iK'i?. 
^'^^j  g'wi  audierunt.  They  are  neither  of  them  grammatically  ad- 
missible, as  the  relative  pronoun  cannot  be  readily  omitted  in  prose; 
and  neither  of  them  would  give  a  really  suitable  meaning.  It  is 
rather  a  rhetorical  resumption  of  the  ^V^f  in  ver.  13,  and  the  sub- 
ject of  the  verb  is  not  only  "  the  Egyptians^'  but  also  "  the  inhabit- 
ants of  this  land"  who  held  communication  with  the  Egyptians,  or 
"  t?ie  nations"  who  had  heard  the  report  of  Jehovah  (ver.  15),  i.e. 
all  that  God  had  hitherto  done  for  and  among  the  Israelites  in 
Egypt,  and  on  the  journey  through  the  desert.  "  Eye  to  eye  :'*  i.e. 
Thou  hast  appeared  to  them  in  the  closest  proximity.  On  the 
pillar  of  cloud  and  fire,  see  at  Ex.  xiii.  21,  22.  ''As  one  man," 
equivalent  to  "  with  a  stroke"  (Judg.  vi.  16). — ^In  vers.  17,  18,  Moses 
adduces  a  second  argument,  viz.  the  word  in  which  God  Himself 
had  revealed  His  inmost  being  to  him  at  Sinai  (Ex.  xxxiv.  6,  7). 
The  words,  "  Let  the  power  be  great,"  equivalent  to  "  show  Thyself 
great  in  power,"  are  not  to  be  connected  with  what  precedes,  but 
with  what  follows  ;  viz.  "sJiow  Thyself  mighty  by  verifying  Thy  word, 
'  Jehovah,  long-suffering  and  great  in  mercy, ^  etc, ;  forgive^  I  beseech 


94  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


Thee^  this  people  according  to  the  greatness  of  Thy  mercy,  and  as 
Thou  hast  forgiven  this  people  from  Egypt  even  until  now"  ^^^  (ver. 
19)  =  py  i^m  (ver.  18). — Ver.  20.  In  answer  to  this  importunate 
prayer,  the  Lord  promised  forgiveness,  namely,  the  preservation  of  fll 
the  nation,  but  not  the  remission  of  the  well-merited  punishment.  "■ 
At  the  rebellion  at  Sinai,  He  had  postponed  the  punishment  "  till 
the  day  of  His  visitation"  (Ex.  xxxii.  34).  And  that  day  had  nowBI 
arrived,  as  the  people  had  carried  their  continued  rebellion  against 
the  Lord  to  the  furthest  extreme,  even  to  an  open  declaration  of 
their  intention  to  depose  Moses,  and  return  to  Egypt  under  another  fl 
leader,  and  thus  had  filled  up  the  measure  of  their  sins.  "  Never- 
theless" added  the  Lord  (vers.  21,  22),  "  as  truly  as  I  live,  and  the 
glory  of  Jehovah  will  fill  the  whole  earth,  all  the  men  who  have  seen 
My  glory  and  My  miracles  .  .  .  shall  not  see  the  land  which  I  sicare 
unto  their  fathers."  The  clause,  "  all  the  earth,"  etc.,  forms  an 
apposition  to  "  as  I  live."  Jehovah  proves  Himself  to  be  living,  by 
the  fact  that  His  glory  fills  the  whole  earth.  But  this  was  to  take 
place,  not,  as  Knohel,  who  mistakes  the  true  connection  of  the  dif- 
ferent clauses,  erroneously  supposes,  by  the  destruction  of  the  whole 
of  that  generation,  which  would  be  talked  of  by  all  the  world,  but 
rather  by  the  fact  that,  notwithstanding  the  sin  and  opposition  of 
these  men,  He  would  still  carry  out  His  work  of  salvation  to  a 
glorious  victory.  The  ""S  in  ver.  22  introduces  the  substance  of  the 
oath,  as  in  Isa.  xlix.  18  ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  39,  xx.  3 ;  and  according  to 
the  ordinary  form  of  an  oath,  Di<  in  ver.  23  signifies  "  not." — "  They 
have  tempted  Me  now  ten  times."  Ten  is  used  as  the  number  of 
completeness  and  full  measure;  and  this  answered  to  the  actual 
fact,  if  we  follow  the  Rabbins,  and  add  to  the  murmuring  (1)  at 
the  Eed  Sea,  Ex.  xiv.  11,  12;  (2)  at  Marah,  Ex.  xv.  23;  (3)  in 
the  wilderness  of  Sin,  Ex.  xvi.  2  ;  (4)  at  Rephidim,  Ex.  xvii.  1 ; 
(5)  at  Horeb,  Ex.  xxxii. ;  (6)  at  Tabeerah,  Num.  xi.  1 ;  (7)  at  the 
graves  of  lust,  Num.  xi.  4  sqq. ;  and  (8)  here  again  at  Kadesh,  the 
twofold  rebellion  of  certain  individuals  against  the  commandments 
of  God  at  the  giving  of  the  manna  (Ex.  xvi.  20  and  27).  The 
despisers  of  God  should  none  of  them  see  the  promised  land. — Ver. 
24.  But  because  there  was  another  spirit  in  Caleb, — i.e.  not  the 
unbelieving,  despairing,  yet  proud  and  rebellious  spirit  of  the  great 
mass  of  the  people,  but  the  spirit  of  obedience  and  believing  trust, 
so  that  "he  followed  Jehovah  fully"  (lit.  "fulfilled  to  walk  behind 
Jehovah"),  followed  Him  with  unwavering  fidelity, — God  would 
bring  him  into  the  land  into  which  he  had  gone,  and  his  seed  should 


CHAP.  XIV.  26-38.  95 

possess  it.  C''?.'-!^  ^.?^  here,  and  at  chap,  xxxii.  11,  12  ;  Deut.  i.  36  ; 
Josh.  xiv.  8,  9 :  1  Kings  xi.  6,  is  a  constructio  prcegnans  for  ^p 
nnx  n^i?^;  cf.  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  31.)  According  to  the  context,  the 
reference  is  not  to  Hebron  particularly,  but  to  Canaan  generally, 
which  God  had  sworn  unto  the  fathers  (ver.  23,  and  Deut.  i.  36, 
comp.  with  ver.  35)  ;  although,  when  the  land  w^as  divided,  Caleb 
received  Hebron  for  his  possession,  because,  according  to  his  own 
statement  in  Josh.  xiv.  6  sqq.,  Moses  had  sworn  that  he  would 
give  it  to  him.  But  this  is  not  mentioned  here ;  just  as  Joshua 
also  is  not  mentioned  in  this  place,  as  he  is  at  vers.  30  and  38,  but 
Caleb  only,  who  opposed  the  exaggerated  accounts  of  the  other 
spies  at  the  veiy  first,  and  endeavoured  to  quiet  the  excitement  of 
the  people  by  declaring  that  they  were  well  able  to  overcome  the 
Canaanites  (chap.  xiii.  30).  This  first  revelation  of  God  to  Moses 
is  restricted  to  the  main  fact ;  the  particulars  are  given  afterwards 
in  the  sentence  of  God,  as  intended  for  communication  to  the 
people  (vers.  26-38). — Ver.  25.  The  divine  reply  to  the  intercession 
of  Moses  terminated  with  a  command  to  the  people  to  turn  on  the 
morrow,  and  go  to  the  wilderness  to  the  Red  Sea,  as  the  Amalek- 
ites  and  Canaanites  dwelt  in  the  valley.  "  The  Amalekites,^'  etc. : 
this  clause  furnishes  the  reason  for  the  command  which  follows. 
On  the  Amalekites,  see  at  Gen.  xxxvi.  12,  and  Ex.  xvii.  8  sqq.  The 
term  Canaanite  is  a  general  epithet  applied  to  all  the  inhabitants 
of  Canaan,  instead  of  the  Amorites  mentioned  in  Deut.  i.  44,  who 
held  the  southern  mountains  of  Canaan.  "  The  valley"  is  no  doubt 
the  broad  Wadi/  Murreh  (see  at  chap.  xiii.  21),  including  a  portion 
of  the  Negeh^  in  which  the  Amalekites  led  a  nomad  life,  whilst  the 
Canaanites  really  dwelt  upon  the  mountains  (ver.  45),  close  up  to 
the  Wady  Murreh, 

Vers.  26-38.  Sentence  upon  the  murmuring  Congrega- 
tion.— After  the  Lord  had  thus  declared  to  Moses  in  general  terms 
His  resolution  to  punish  the  incorrigible  people,  and  not  suffer  them 
to  come  to  Canaan,  He  proceeded  to  tell  him  what  announcement 
he  was  to  make  to  the  people. — Ver.  27.  This  announcement  com- 
mences in  a  tone  of  anger,  with  an  aposiopesis,  "  How  long  this  evil 
congregation'^  (so.  "  shall  I  forgive  it,"  the  simplest  plan  being  to 
supply  i^\^^,  as  RosenmuUer  suggests,  from  ver.  18),  "  that  they 
murmur  against  MeV — Vers.  28-31.  Jehovah  swore  that  it  should 
happen  to  the  murmurers  as  they  had  spoken.  Their  corpses 
should  fall  in  the  desert,  even  all  who  had  been  numbered,  from 


9(3'  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


^ 


twenty  years  old  and  upwards :  they  should  not  see  the  land  into 
which  Jehovah  had  lifted  up  His  hand  (see  at  Ex.  vi.  8)  to  lead  them, 
with  the  sole  exception  of  Caleb  and  Joshua.  But  their  children, 
who,  as  they  said,  would  be  a  prey  (ver.  3),  them  Jehovah  would 
bring,  and  they  should  learn  to  know  the  land  which  the  others  had 
despised. — Vers.  32,  33.  '' As  for  you,  your  carcases  will  fall  in  this 
wilderness.  But  your  sons  will  he  pasturing  (i.e.  will  lead  a  restless 
shepherd  life)  in  the  desert  forty  years,  and  hear  your  whoredom  {i.e. 
endure  the  consequences  of  your  faithless  apostasy  ;  see  Ex.  xxxiv. 
16),  until  your  corpses  are  finished  in  the  desert^^  i.e.  till  you  have  all 
passed  away. — Yer.  34.  "  After  the  numher  of  the  forty  days  that  ye 
have  searched  the  land,  shall  ye  hear  your  iniquity,  (reckoning)  a  day 
for  a  year,  and  know  My  turning  away  from  you^^  or  ^^?^l3r^,  ahalienatio, 
from  t?iJ  (chap,  xxxii.  7). — Yer.  35.  As  surely  as  Jehovah  had 
spoken  this,  would  He  do  it  to  that  evil  congregation,  to  those  who 
had  allied  themselves  against  Him  ("1X^3,  to  bind  themselves  together, 
to  conspire  ;  chap.  xvi.  11,  xxvii.  3).  There  is  no  ground  whatever 
for  questioning  the  correctness  of  the  statement,  that  the  spies  had 
travelled  through  Canaan  for  forty  days,  or  regarding  this  as  a  so- 
called  round  number — that  is  to  say,  as  unhistorical.  And  if  this 
number  is  firmly  established,  there  is  also  no  ground  for  disputing 
the  forty  years'  sojourn  of  the  people  in  the  wilderness,  although 
the  period  during  which  the  rebellious  generation,  consisting  of 
those  who  were  numbered  at  Sinai,  died  out,  was  actually  thirty- 
eight  years,  reaching  from  the  autumn  of  the  second  year  after 
their  departure  from  Egypt  to  the  middle  of  the  fortieth  year  of 
their  wanderings,  and  terminating  with  the  fresh  numbering  (chap, 
xxvi.)  that  was  undertaken  after  the  death  of  Aaron,  and  took  place 
on  the  first  of  the  fifth  month  of  the  fortieth  year  (chap.  xx.  23 
sqq.,  compared  with  chap,  xxxiii.  38).  Instead  of  these  thirty-eight 
years,  the  forty  years  of  the  sojourn  in  the  desert  are  placed  in 
connection  with  the  forty  days  of  the  spies,  because  the  people  had 
frequently  fallen  away  from  God,  and  been  punished  in  conse- 
quence, even  during  the  year  and  a  half  before  their  rejection ; 
and  in  this  respect  the  year  and  a  half  could  be  combined  with  the 
thirty-eight  years  which  followed  into  one  continuous  period,  during 
which  they  bore  their  iniquity,  to  set  distinctly  before  the  minds  of 
the  disobedient  people  the  contrast  between  that  peaceful  dwelling 
in  the  promised  land  which  they  had  forfeited,  and  the  restless 
wandering  in  the  desert,  which  had  been  imposed  upon  them  as  a 
punishment,  and  to  impress  upon  them  the  causal  connection  be- 


CHAP.  XIV.  39-45.  97 

tween  sin  and  suffering.  "  Every  year  that  passed,  and  was  de- 
ducted from  the  forty  years  of  punishment,  was  a  new  and  solemn 
exhortation  to  repent,  as  it  called  to  mind  the  occasion  of  their 
rejection"  {Kurtz).  When  Knohel  observes,  on  the  other  hand, 
that  "  it  is  utterly  improbable  that  all  who  came  out  of  Egypt 
(that  is  to  say,  all  who  were  twenty  years  old  and  upward  when 
they  came  out)  should  have  fallen  in  the  desert,  with  the  exception 
of  two,  and  that  there  should  have  been  no  men  found  among  the 
Israelites  when  they  entered  Canaan  who  were  more  than  sixty 
years  of  age,"  the  express  statement,  that  on  the  second  numbering 
there  was  not  a  man  among  those  that  were  numbered  who  had 
been  included  in  the  numbering  at  Sinai,  except  Joshua  and  Caleb 
(chap.  xxvi.  64  sqq.),  is  amply  sufficient  to  overthrow  this  "  impro- 
bability" as  an  unfounded  fancy.  Nor  is  this  statement  rendered 
at  all  questionable  by  the  fact,  that  "  Aaron's  son  Eleazar,  who 
entered  Canaan  with  Joshua"  (Josh.  xiv.  1,  etc.),  was  most  likely 
more  than  twenty  years  old  at  the  time  of  his  consecration  at  Sinai, 
as  the  Levites  were  not  qualified  for  service  till  their  thirtieth  or 
twenty-fifth  year.  For,  in  the  first  place,  the  regulation  concerning 
the  Levites'  age  of  service  is  not  to  be  applied  without  reserve  to 
the  priests  also,  so  that  we  could  infer  from  this  that  the  sons  of 
Aaron  must  have  been  at  least  twenty-five  or  thirty  years  old  when 
they  were  consecrated ;  and  besides  this,  the  priests  do  not  enter 
into  the  question  at  all,  for  the  tribe  of  Levi  was  excepted  from 
the  numbering  in  chap,  i.,  and  therefore  Aaron's  sons  were  not 
included  among  the  persons  numbered,  who  were  sentenced  to  die 
in  the  wilderness.  Still  less  does  it  follow  from  Josh.  xxiv.  7  and 
Judg.  ii.  7,  where  it  is  stated  that,  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan, 
there  were  many  still  alive  who  had  been  eye-witnesses  of  the 
wonders  of  God  in  Egypt,  that  they  must  have  been  more  than 
twenty  years  old  when  they  came  out  of  Egypt ;  for  youths  from 
ten  to  nineteen  years  of  age  would  certainly  have  been  able  to 
remember  such  miracles  as  these,  even  after  the  lapse  of  forty  or 
fifty  years. — Vers.  36—38.  But  for  the  purpose  of  giving  to  the 
whole  congregation  a  practical  proof  of  the  solemnity  of  the  divine 
threatening  of  punishment,  the  spies  who  had  induced  the  congre- 
gation to  revolt,  through  their  evil  report  concerning  the  inhabitants 
of  Canaan,  were  smitten  by  a  "  stroke  before  Jehovah,"  i.e.  by  a 
sudden  death,  which  proceeded  in  a  visible  manner  from  Jehovah 
Himself,  whilst  Joshua  and  Caleb  remained  alive. 

Vers.  39-45  (cf.  Deut.  i.  41-44).  The  announcement  of  the 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  G 


98  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

sentence  plunged  the  people  into  deep  mourning.  But  instead  of 
bending  penitentially  under  the  judgment  of  God,  they  resolved  to 
atone  for  their  error,  by  preparing  the  next  morning  to  go  to  the 
top  of  the  mountain  and  press  forward  into  Canaan.  And  they 
would  not  even  suffer  themselves  to  be  dissuaded  from  their  enter- 
prise by  the  entreaties  of  Moses,  who  denounced  it  as  a  transgres- 
sion of  the  word  of  God  which  could  not  succeed,  and  predicted 
their  overthrow  before  their  enemies,  but  went  presumptuously 
(T\)by^  ^^SV!)  up  without  the  ark  of  the  covenant  and  without  Moses, 
who  did  not  depart  out  of  the  midst  of  the  camp,  and  were  smitten 
by  the  Amalekites  and  Oanaanites,  who  drove  them  back  as  far  as 
Hormah.  Whereas  at  first  they  had  refused  to  enter  upon  the  con- 
flict with  the  Oanaanites,  through  their  unbelief  in  the  might  of 
the  promise  of  God,  now,  through  unbelief  in  the  severity  of  the 
judgment  of  God,  they  resolved  to  engage  in  this  conflict  by  their 
own  power,  and  without  the  help  of  God,  and  to  cancel  the  old  sin 
of  unbelieving  despair  through  the  new  sin  of  presumptuous  self- 
confidence, — an  attempt  which  could  never  succeed,  but  was  sure  to 
plunge  deeper  and  deeper  into  misery.  Where  "  the  top  (or  height) 
of  the  mountairib^  to  which  the  Israelites  advanced  was,  cannot  be  pre- 
cisely determined,  as  we  have  no  minute  information  concerning  the 
nature  of  the  ground  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Kadesh.  No  doubt 
the  allusion  is  to  some  plateau  on  the  northern  border  of  the  valley 
mentioned  in  ver.  25,  viz.  the  Wady  Murreh,  which  formed  the 
southernmost  spur  of  the  mountains  of  the  Amorites,  from  which 
the  Oanaanites  and  Amalekites  came  against  them,  and  drove  them 
back.  In  Deut.  i.  44,  Moses  mentions  the  Amorites  instead  of  the 
Amalekites  and  Oanaanites,  using  the  name  in  a  broader  sense  for 
all  the  Oanaanites,  and  contenting  himself  with  naming  the  leading 
foes  with  whom  the  Amalekites  who  wandered  about  in  the  Negeh 
had  allied  themselves,  as  Bedouins  thirsting  for  booty.  These  tribes 
came  down  (ver.  45)  from  the  height  of  the  mountain  to  the  lower 
plateau  or  saddle,  which  the  Israelites  had  ascended,  and  smote  them 
and  D^ns^  (from  riri3,  with  the  reduplication  of  the  second  radical 
anticipated  in  the  first :  see  Ewald,  §  193,  c),  "  discomfited  them, 
as  far  as  Hormah,"  or  as  Moses  expresses  it  in  Deut.  i.  44,  They 
"  chased  you,  as  bees  do"  (which  pursue  with  great  ferocity  any  one 
who  attacks  or  disturbs  them),  "and  destroyed  you  in  Seir,  even  unto 
Hormah."  There  is  not  sufficient  ground  for  altering  "  in  Seir" 
into  "  from  Seir,"  as  the  LXX.,  Syriac,  and  Vulgate  have  done. 
But  'T'V^a  might  signify  "  into  Seir,  as  far  as  Hormah."     As  the 


I 


CHAP.  XV.-XIX.  99 

Edomites  had  extended  their  territor}^  at  that  time  across  the  Ara- 
bah  towards  the  west,  and  taken  possession  of  a  portion  of  the 
mountainous  country  which  bounded  the  desert  of  Paran  towards 
the  north  (see  at  chap,  xxxiv.  3),  the  Israelites,  when  driven  back 
by  them,  might  easily  be  chased  into  the  territory  of  the  Edomites. 
Hormah  (i.e.  the  ban-place)  is  used  here  proleptically  (see  at  chap. 
xxi.  3). 

OCCURRENCES  DURING  THE  THIRTY-SEVEN  YEARS  OF  WANDERING 
IN  THE  WILDERNESS. — CHAP.  XV.-XIX. 

After  the  unhappy  issue  of  the  attempt  to  penetrate  into  Canaan, 
in  opposition  to  the  will  of  God  and  the  advice  of  Moses,  the  Israel- 
ites remained  "  many  days"  in  Kadesh,  as  the  Lord  did  not  hearken 
to  their  lamentations  concerning  the  defeat  which  they  had  suffered 
at  the  hands  of  the  Canaanites  and  Amalekites.  Then  they  turned, 
and  took  their  journey,  as  the  Lord  had  commanded  (chap.  xiv.  25), 
into  the  wilderness,  in  the  direction  towards  the  Ked  Sea  (Deut.  i. 
45,  ii.  1)  ;  and  in  the  first  month  of  the  fortieth  year  they  came 
again  into  the  desert  of  Zin,  to  Kadesh  (chap.  xx.  1).  All  that  we 
know  respecting  this  journeying  from  Kadesh  into  the  wilderness 
in  the  direction  towards  the  Eed  Sea,  and  up  to  the  time  of  their 
return  to  the  desert  of  Zin,  is  limited  to  a  number  of  names  of 
places  of  encampment  given  in  the  list  of  journeying  stages  in 
chap,  xxxiii.  19-30,  out  of  which,  as  the  situation  of  the  majority 
of  them  is  altogether  unknown,  or  at  all  events  has  not  yet  been 
determined,  no  connected  account  of  the  journeys  of  Israel  during 
this  interval  of  thirty-seven  years  can  possibly  be  drawn.  The 
most  important  event  related  in  connection  wdth  this  period  is  the 
rebellion  of  the  company  of  Korah  against  Moses  and  Aaron,  and 
the  re-establishment  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  and  confirmation  of 
their  rights,  which  this  occasioned  (chaps,  xvi.-xviii.).  This  rebellion 
probably  occurred  iij  the  first  portion  of  the  period  in  question.  In 
addition  to  this  there  are  only  a  few  laws  recorded,  which  were 
issued  during  this  long  time  of  punishment,  and  furnished  a  prac- 
tical proof  of  the  continuance  of  the  covenant  which  the  Lord  had 
made  with  the  nation  of  Israel  at  Sinai.  There  was  nothing  more 
to  record  in  connection  with  these  thirty-seven  years,  which  formed 
the  second  stage  in  the  guidance  of  Israel  through  the  desert.  For, 
as  Baumgarten  has  well  observed,  "  the  fighting  men  of  Israel  had 
fallen  under  the   judgment  of  Jehovah,  and  the  sacred  history, 


100  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

therefore,  was  no  longer  concerned  with  them ;  whilst  the  youth, 
in  whom  the  life  and  hope  of  Israel  were  preserved,  had  as  yet  no 
history  at  all."  Consequently  we  have  no  reason  to  complain,  as 
Ewald  does  (GescJi.  ii.  pp.  241,  242),  that  "the  great  interval  of 
forty  years  remains  a  perfect  void ;"  and  still  less  occasion  to  dispose 
of  the  gap,  as  this  scholar  has  done,  by  supposing  that  the  last 
historian  left  out  a  great  deal  from  the  history  of  the  forty  years' 
wanderings.  The  supposed  "void"  was  completely  filled  up  by 
the  gradual  dying  out  of  the  generation  which  had  been  rejected 
by  God. 

Various  Laws  of  Sacrifice.     Punishment  of  a  Sahhath-hreaher. 
Command  to  wear  Tassels  upon  the  Clothes. — Chap.  xv. 

Vers.  1-31.  Kegulations  concerning  Sacrifices. — Vers. 
1—16.  For  the  purpose  of  reviving  the  hopes  of  the  new  generation 
that  was  growing  up,  and  directing  their  minds  to  the  promised 
land,  during  the  mournful  and  barren  time  when  judgment  was 
being  executed  upon  the  race  that  had  been  condemned,  Jehovah 
communicated  various  laws  through  Moses  concerning  the  presen- 
tation of  sacrifices  in  the  land  that  He  would  give  them  (vers.  1  and 
2),  whereby  the  former  laws  of  sacrifice  were  supplemented  and 
completed.  The  first  of  these  laws  had  reference  to  the  connection 
between  meat-offerings  and  drink-offerings  on  the  one  hand,  andflj 
burnt-offerings  and  slain-offerings  on  the  other. — Vers.  3  sqq.  In 
the  land  of  Canaan,  every  burnt  and  slain-offering,  whether  prepared 
in  fulfilment  of  a  vow,  or  spontaneously,  or  on  feast-days  (cf.  Lev. 
vii.  16,  xxii.  18,  and  xxiii.  38),  was  to  be  associated  with  a  meat- 
offering of  fine  flour  mixed  with  oil,  and  a  drink-offering  of  wine, — 
the  quantity  to  be  regulated  according  to  the  kind  of  animal  that 
was  slain  in  sacrifice.  (See  Lev.  xxiii.  18,  where  this  connection 
if?  already  mentioned  in  the  case  of  the  festal  sacrifices.)  For  a 
lamb  (^55,  i.e.  either  sheep  or  goat,  cf.  ver.  11),  they  were  to  take 
the  tenth  of  an  ephah  of  fine  flour,  mixed  with  the  quarter  of  a  hin 
of  oil  and  the  quarter  of  a  hin  of  wine,  as  a  drink-offering.  In  ver. 
5,  the  construction  changes  from  the  third  to  the  second  person. 
^^V,  to  prepare,  as  in  Ex.  xxix.  38. — Yers.  6,  7.  For  a  ram,  they 
were  to  take  two  tenths  of  fine  flour,  with  the  third  of  a  hin  of  oil 
and  the  third  of  a  hin  of  wine. — ^Vers.  8  sqq.  For  an  ox,  three 
tenths  of  fine  flour,  with  half  a  hin  of  oil  and  half  a  hin  of  wine. 
The  n"'")i5n  (3cl  person)  in  ver.  9,  between  nb^yn  in  ver.  8,  and  nnipn 
in  ver.  10,  is  certainly  striking  and  unusual,  but  not  so  offensive  as 


I 

r 


CHAP.  XV.  1-31.  101 

to  render  it  necessary  to  alter  it  into  ^'•"liP^l. — Vers.  11,  12.  Tiie 
(quantities  mentioned  were  to  be  offered  with  every  ox,  or  ram,  or 
lamb,  of  either  sheep  or  goat,  and  therefore  the  number  of  the 
appointed  quantities  of  meat  and  drink-offerings  was  to  correspond 
to  the  number  of  sacrificial  animals. — Yers.  13-16.  These  rules 
were  to  apply  not  only  to  the  sacrifices  of  those  that  were  born  in 
Israel,  but  also  to  those  of  the  strangers  living  among  them.  By 
"  these  things,"  in  ver.  13,  we  are  to  understand  the  meat  and  drink- 
offerings  already  appointed. — Ver.  15.  ''As  for  the  assembly ,  there 
shall  be  one  law  for  the  Israelite  and  the  stranger^  .  .  ,  an  eternal 
ordinance  .  .  .  before  Jehovah^  ''f^ij'],  which  is  construed  absolutely, 
refers  to  the  assembling  of  the  nation  before  Jehovah,  or  to  the 
congregation  viewed  in  its  attitude  with  regard  to  God. 

A  second  law  (vers.  17-21)  appoints,  on  the  ground  of  the 
general  regulations  in  Ex.  xxii.  28  and  xxiii.  19,  the  presentation 
of  a  heave-offering  from  the  bread  which  they  would  eat  in  the 
land  of  Canaan,  viz.  a  first-fruit  of  groat-meal  (rib^'?JJ  ri''tJ'i<'n)  baked 
as  cake  ij^^)»  Arisoth,  which  is  only  used  in  connection  with  the 
gift  of  first-fruits,  in  Ezek.  xliv.  30,  Neh.  x.  38,  and  the  passage 
before  us,  signifies  most  probably  groats,  or  meal  coarsely  bruised, 
like  the  talmudical  |p")y,  contusum^  mola^  far,  and  indeed /ar  hordei. 
This  cake  of  the  groats  of  first-fruits  they  were  to  offer  "  as  a  heave- 
offering  of  the  threshing-floor j^  i.e.  as  a  heave-offering  of  the  bruised 
corn,  in  the  same  manner  as  this  (therefore,  in  addition  to  it,  and 
along  with  it)  ;  and  that  "  according  to  your  generations  "  (see  Ex. 
xii.  14),  that  is  to  say,  for  all  time,  to  consecrate  a  gift  of  first- 
fruits  to  the  Lord,  not  only  of  the  grains  of  corn,  but  also  of  the 
bread  made  from  the  corn,  and  "  to  cause  a  blessing  to  rest  upon  his 
house"  (Ezek.  xliv.  30).  Like  all  the  gifts  of  first-fruits,  this  cake 
also  fell  to  the  portion  of  the  priests  (see  Ezek.  and  Neh.  ut  sup.). 

To  these  there  are  added,  in  vers.  22,  31,  laws  relating  to  sin- 
off'erings,  the  first  of  which,  in  vers.  22-26,  is  distinguished  from 
the  case  referred  to  in  Lev.  iv.  13-21,  by  the  fact  that  the  sin  is 
not  described  here,  as  it  is  there,  as  "  doing  one  of  the  command- 
ments of  Jehovah  which  ought  not  to  be  done,"  but  as  "  not  doing 
all  that  Jehovah  had  spoken  through  Moses."  Consequently,  the 
allusion  here  is  not  to  sins  of  commission,  but  to  sins  of  omission, 
not  following  the  law  of  God,  "  even  (as  is  afterwards  explained 
in  ver.  23)  all  that  the  Lord  hath  commanded  you  by  the  hand  of 
Moses  from  the  day  that  the  Lord  hath  commanded,  and  thencefor- 
ward according  to  your  generations,^'  i.e.  since  the  first  beginning  of 


102  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


the  giving  of  the  law,  and  during  the  whole  of  the  time  following 
{Knohel).  These  words  apparently  point  to  a  complete  falling  away 
of  the  congregation  from  the  whole  of  the  law.  Only  the  further 
stipulation  in  ver.  24,  "  if  it  occur  away  from  the  eyes  of  the  congrega- 
tion through  error  "  (in  oversight),  cannot  be  easily  reconciled  with 
this,  as  it  seems  hardly  conceivable  that  an  apostasy  from  the  entire 
law  should  have  remained  hidden  from  the  congregation.  This  "  not^l 
doing  all  the  commandments  of  Jehovah,"  of  which  the  congrega-"" 
tion  is  supposed  to  incur  the  guilt  without  perceiving  it,  might 
consist  either  in  the  fact  that,  in  particular  instances,  whether  from 
oversight  or  negligence,  the  whole  congregation  omitted  to  fulfil  the 
commandments  of  God,  i.e.  certain  precepts  of  the  law,  sc.  in  the 
fact  that  they  neglected  the  true  and  proper  fulfilment  of  the  whole*  I 
law,  either,  as  Outram  supposes,  "  by  retaining  to  a  certain  extent 
the  national  rites,  and  following  the  worship  of  the  true  God,  and 
yet  at  the  same  time  acting  unconsciously  in  opposition  to  the  law, 
through  having  been  led  astray  by  some  common  errors ; "  or  by 
allowing  the  evil  example  of  godless  rulers  to  seduce  them  to 
neglect  their  religious  duties,  or  to  adopt  and  join  in  certain 
customs  and  usages  of  the  heathen,  which  appeared  to  be  recon- 
cilable with  the  law  of  Jehovah,  though  they  really  led  to  contempt 
and  neglect  of  the  commandments  of  the  Lord.^  But  as  a  disregard 
or  neglect  of  the  commandments  of  God  had  to  be  expiated,  a^ 
burnt-offering  was  to  be  added  to  the  sin-offering,  that  the  separa-  ™ 
tion  of  the  congregation  from  the  Lord,  which  had  arisen  from  the 
sin  of  omission,  might  be  entirely  removed.  The  apodosis  com- 
mences with  7m  in  ver.  24,  but  is  interrupted  by  '""i^o  D{<,  and  resumed 
again  with  ^OT,  "  it  shall  he,  if .  .  .  .  the  whole  congregation  shall 
prepare,^^  etc.  The  burnt-offering,  being  the  principal  sacrifice,  is 
mentioned  as  usual  before  the  sin-offering,  although,  when  pre- 
sented, it  followed  the  latter,  on  account  of  its  being  necessary  that 

'  Maimonides  (see  Outram^  ex  veterum  sententia)  understands  this  law  as 
relating  to  extraneous  worship ;  and  Outram  himself  refers  to  the  times  of  the 
wicked  kings,  "  when  the  people  neglected  their  hereditary  rites,  and,  forgetting 
the  sacred  laws,  fell  by  a  common  sin  into  the  observance  of  the  religious  rites 
of  other  nations."  Undoubtedly,  we  have  historical  ground  in  2  Chron.  xxix. 
21  sqq.,  and  Ezra  viii.  35,  for  this  interpretation  of  our  law,  but  further  allusions 
are  not  excluded  in  consequence.  "We  cannot  agree  with  Baumgarten^  there- 
fore, in  restricting  the  difference  between  Lev.  iv.  13  sqq.  and  the  passage 
before  us  to  the  fact,  that  the  former  supposes  the  transgression  of  one  par- 
ticular commandment  on  the  part  of  the  whole  congregation,  whilst  the  latter 
(vers.  22,  23)  refers  to  a  continued  lawless  condition  on  the  part  of  Israel. 


CHAP.  XV.  32-36.  103 

the  sin  should  be  expiated  before  the  congregation  could  sanctify 
its  life  and  efforts  afresh  to  the  Lord  in  the  burnt-offering.  "  One 
kid  of  the  goats  : "  see  Lev.  iv.  23.  lOSK^S  (as  in  Lev.  v.  10,  ix. 
16,  etc.)  refers  to  the  right  established  in  vers.  8,  9,  concerning  the 
combination  of  the  meat  and  drink-offering  with  the  burnt-offer- 
ing. The  sin-offering  was  to  be  treated  according  to  the  rule  laid 
down  in  Lev.  iv.  14  sqq. — Ver.  26.  This  law  was  to  apply  not  only 
to  the  children  of  Israel,  but  also  to  the  stranger  among  them,  "/or 
(sc.  it  has  happened)  to  the  whole  nation  in  mistake. ^^  As  the  sin 
extended  to  the  whole  nation,  in  which  the  foreigners  were  also  in- 
cluded, the  atonement  was  also  to  apply  to  the  whole. — Vers.  27—31. 
In  the  same  way,  again,  there  was  one  law  for  the  native  and  the 
stranger,  in  relation  to  sins  of  omission  on  the  part  of  single  indivi- 
duals. The  law  laid  down  in  Lev.  v.  6  (cf.  Lev.  iv.  27  sqq.)  for 
the  Israelites,  is  repeated  here  in  vers.  27,  28,  and  in  ver.  28  it  is 
raised  into  general  validity  for  foreigners  also.  In  ver.  29,  niTNin 
is  written  absolutely  for  nntXP. — Vers.  30,  31.  But  it  was  only  sins 
committed  by  mistake  (see  at  Lev.  iv.  2)  that  could  be  expiated 
by  sin-offerings.  Whoever,  on  the  other  hand,  whether  a  native  or 
a  foreigner,  committed  a  sin  "  with  a  high  hand^^ — i.e.  so  that  he 
raised  his  hand,  as  it  were,  against  Jehovah,  or  acted  in  open  re- 
bellion against  Him, — blasphemed  God,  and  was  to  be  cut  off  (see 
Gen.  xvii.  14) ;  for  he  had  despised  the  word  of  Jehovah,  and 
broken  His  commandment,  and  was  to  atone  for  it  with  his  life. 
nn  njiy,  "  its  crime  upon  it ; "  i.e.  it  shall  come  upon  such  a  soul  in 
the  punishment  which  it  shall  endure. 

Vers.  32-36.  The  history  of  the  Sabbath-breaker  is  no 
doubt  inserted  here  as  a  practical  illustration  of  sinning  "  with  a 
high  hand."  It  shows,  too,  at  the  same  time,  how  the  nation,  as  a 
whole,  was  impressed  with  the  inviolable  sanctity  of  the  Lord's  day. 
From  the  words  with  which  it  is  introduced,  "  and  the  children  of 
Israel  were  in  the  wildeimess^^^  all  that  can  be  gathered  is,  that  the 
occurrence  took  place  at  the  time  when  Israel  was  condemned  to 
wander  about  in  the  wilderness  for  forty  years.  They  found  a  man 
gathering  sticks  in  the  desert  on  the  Sabbath,  and  brought  him  as 
an  open  transgressor  of  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  before  Moses  and 
Aaron  and  the  whole  congregation,  i.e.  the  college  of  elders,  as  the 
judicial  authorities  of  the  congregation  (Ex.  xviii.  2b  sqq.).  They 
kept  him  in  custody,  like  the  blasphemer  in  Lev.  xxiv.  12,  because 
it  had  not  yet  been  determined  what  was  to  be  done  to  him.     It 


104  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

is  true  that  it  had  already  been  laid  down  in  Ex.  xxxi.  14,  15,  and 
XXXV.  2,  that  any  breach  of  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  should  be 
punished  by  death  and  extermination,  but  the  mode  had  not  yet 
been  prescribed.  This  was  done  now,  and  Jehovah  commanded 
stoning  (see  Lev.  xx.  2),  which  was  executed  upon  the  criminal 
without  delay. 

Vers.    37-41    (cf.   Deut.   xxii.    12).    The   command   to   wear 

TASSELS  ON   THE  EDGE  OF   THE  UPPER   GARMENT  appears   to  have 

been  occasioned  by  the  incident  just  described.  The  Israelites 
were  to  wear  n^''V,  tassels,  on  the  wings  of  their  upper  garments, 
or,  according  to  Deut.  xxii.  12,  at  the  four  corners  of  the  upper 
garment.  ri1D3,  the  covering  in  which  a  man  wraps  himself,  syno- 
nymous with  ^^3,  was  the  upper  garment,  consisting  of  a  four-cor- 
nered cloth  or  piece  of  stuff,  which  was  thrown  over  the  body-coat 
(see  my  Bibl.  Archdol.  ii.  pp.  36,  37),  and  is  not  to  be  referred,  as 
Schultz  supposes,  to  the  bed-coverings  also,  although  this  garment 
was  actually  used  as  a  counterpane  by  the  poor  (see  Ex.  xxii.  25, 
26).  "  And  upon  the  tassel  of  the  wing  they  shall  put  a  string  of 
hyacinth-blue^^  namely,  to  fasten  the  tassel  to  the  edge  of  the  gar- 
ment. T\T)^  (/^^^-j  from  ^''V,  the  glittering,  the  bloom  or  flower) 
signifies  something  flowery  or  bloom-like,  and  is  used  in  Ezek.  viii.  3 
for  a  lock  of  hair ;  here  it  is  applied  to  a  tassel,  as  being  made  of 
twisted  threads  :  LXX.  KpdaireBa  ;  Matt,  xxiii.  5,  "  borders."  The 
size  of  these  tassels  is  not  prescribed.  The  Pharisees  liked  to  make 
them  large,  to  exhibit  openly  their  punctilious  fulfilment  of  the  law. 
For  the  Kabbinical  directions  how  to  make  them,  see  Carpzov. 
apparat.  pp.  197  sqq. ;  and  Bodenschatz,  kirchliche  Verfassung  der 
heutigen  Juden,  iv.  pp.  11  sqq. — Ver.  39.  '''And  it  shall  he  to  you  for  a 
tassel"  i.e.  the  fastening  of  the  tassel  with  the  dark  blue  thread  to  the 
corners  of  your  garments  shall  be  to  you  a  tassel,  "  that  ye,  when  ye 
see  it,  may  remember  all  the  commandments  of  Jehovah,  and  do  them  ; 
and  ye  shall  not  stray  after  your  hearts  and  your  eyes,  after  which  ye 
go  a  vjhoring."  The  ziziih  on  the  sky-blue  thread  was  to  serve  as 
a  memorial  sign  to  the  Israelites,  to  remind  them  of  the  command- 
ments of  God,  that  they  might  have  them  constantly  before  their 
eyes  and  follow  them,  and  not  direct  their  heart  and  eyes  to  the 
things  of  this  world,  which  turn  away  from  the  word  of  God,  and 
lead  astray  to  idolatry  (cf.  Prov.  iv.  25,  26).  Another  reason  for 
these  instructions,  as  is  afterwards  added  in  ver.  40,  was  to  remind 
Israel  of  all  the  commandments  of  the  Lord,  that  they  might  do 


i 


I 


CHAP.  XVI.  1-3.  105 

them  and  be  holy  to  their  God,  and  sanctify  their  daily  life  to  Hini 
who  had  brought  them  out  of  Egypt,  to  be  their  God,  i.e.  to  show 
Himself  as  God  to  them. 

Rehellion  of  Koralis  Company, — Chap,  xvi.-xvii.  5. 

The  sedition  of  Korah  and  his  company,  with  the  renewed 
sanction  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  on  the  part  of  God  which  it 
occasioned,  is  the  only  important  occurrence  recorded  in  connection 
with  the  thirty-seven  years'  wandering  in  the  wilderness.  The 
time  and  place  are  not  recorded.  The  fact  that  the  departure  from 
Kadesh  is  not  mentioned  in  chap,  xiv.,  whilst,  according  to  Deut. 
i.  46,  Israel  remained  there  many  days,  is  not  sufficient  to  warrant 
the  conclusion  that  it  took  place  in  Kadesh.  The  departure  from 
Kadesh  is  not  mentioned  even  after  the  rebellion  of  Korah ;  and 
yet  we  read,  in  chap.  xx.  1,  that  the  whole  congregation  came  again 
into  the  desert  of  Zin  to  Kadesh  at  the  beginning  of  the  fortieth 
year,  and  therefore  must  previously  have  gone  away.  All  that  can 
be  laid  down  as  probable  is,  that  it  occurred  in  one  of  the  earliest 
of  the  thirty-seven  years  of  punishment,  though  we  have  no  firm 
ground  even  for  this  conjecture. 

Vers.  1—3.  The  authors  of  the  rebellion  were  Korah  the  Levite, 
a  descendant  of  the  Kohathite  Izhar,  who  was  a  brother  of  Amram, 
an  ancestor  (not  the  father)  of  Aaron  and  Moses  (see  at  Ex.  vi.  18), 
and  three  Reubenites,  viz.  Dathan  and  Abiram,  sons  of  Eliab,  of 
the  Reubenitish  family  of  Pallu  (chap.  xxvi.  8,  9),  and  On,  the  son 
of  Peleth,  a  Reubenite,  not  mentioned  again.  The  last  of  these 
(On)  is  not  referred  to  again  in  the  further  course  of  this  event, 
either  because  he  played  altogether  a  subordinate  part  in  the  affair, 
or  because  he  had  drawn  back  before  the  conspiracy  came  to  a 
head.  The  persons  named  took  (^^\),  i.e.  gained  over  to  their  plan, 
or  persuaded  to  join  them,  250  distinguished  men  of  the  other 
tribes,  and  rose  up  with  them  against  Moses  and  Aaron.  On  the 
construction  ^Olp*l  .  .  .  n,"?*}  (vers.  1  and  2),  Gesenius  correctly 
observes  in  his  Thesaurus  (p.  760),  "There  is  an  anaholouthon 
rather  than  an  ellipsis,  and  not  merely  a  copyist's  error,  in  these 
words,  '  and  Korah,  .  .  .  and  Dathan  and  A  biram,  took  and  rose  up 
against  Moses  with  250  wen,'  for  they  took  250  men,  and  rose  up 
with  them  against  ^Moses,"  etc.  He  also  points  to  the  analogous 
construction  in  2  Sam.  xviii.  18.  Consequently  there  is  no  neces- 
sity either  to  force  a  meaning  upon  ni??,  which  is  altogether  foreign 
to  it,  or  to  attempt  an  emendation  of  the  text.     "  They  rose  up 


106  THE  FOUKTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

before  Moses  :"  this  does  not  mean,  "  they  stood  up  in  front  of  his 
tent,"  as  Knohel  explains  it,  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  ver.  2  into 
contradiction  with  ver.  3,  but  they  created  an  uproar  before  his 
eyes ;  and  with  this  the  expression  in  ver.  3,  "  and  they  gathered 
themselves  together  against  Moses  and  Aaron"  may  be  very  simply 
and  easily  combined.  The  250  men  of  the  children  of  Israel  who 
joined  the  rebels  no  doubt  belonged  to  the  other  tribes,  as  is  in- 
directly implied  in  the  statement  in  chap,  xxvii.  3,  that  Zelophehad 
the  Manassite  was  not  in  the  company  of  Korah.  These  men  were 
'^princes  of  the  congregation^^  i.e.  heads  of  the  tribes,  or  of  large 
divisions  of  the  tribes,  "  called  men  of  the  congregation^^  i.e,  mem- 
bers of  the  council  of  the  nation  which  administered  the  affairs  of 
the  congregation  (cf.  i.  16),  '^men  of  name'*  (p^  ^?^^^j  see  Gen.  vi. 
4).  The  leader  was  Korah ;  and  the  rebels  are  called  in  conse- 
quence '^  KoraKs  company**  (vers.  5,  6,  chap.  xxvi.  9,  xxvii.  3). 
He  laid  claim  to  the  high-priesthood,  or  at  least  to  an  equality  with 
Aaron  (ver.  17).  Among  his  associates  were  the  Reubenites, 
Dathan  and  Abiram,  who,  no  doubt,  were  unable  to  get  over  the 
fact  that  the  birthright  had  been  taken  away  from  their  ancestor, 
and  with  it  the  headship  of  the  house  of  Israel  {i.e.  of  the  whole 
nation).  Apparently  their  present  intention  was  to  seize  upon  the 
government  of  the  nation  under  a  self-elected  high  priest,  and  to 
force  Moses  and  Aaron  out  of  the  post  assigned  to  them  by  God, — 
that  is  to  say,  to  overthrow  the  constitution  which  God  had  given 
to  His  people. — Ver.  3.  ^^J^"^"!,  "  enough  for  you  I "  (2"i,  as  in  Gen. 
xlv.  28),  they  said  to  Moses  and  Aaron,  i.e,  "  let  the  past  suffice 
you"  (Knohel) ;  ye  have  held  the  priesthood  and  the  government 
quite  long  enough.  It  must  now  come  to  an  end;  "/or  the  whole 
congregation,  all  of  them  (i.e.  all  the  members  of  the  nation),  are 
holy,  and  Jehovah  is  in  the  m,idst  of  them.  Wherefore  lift  ye  your- 
selves above  the  congregation  of  Jehovah  V*  The  distinction  between 
^1)i,  and  S^i?  is  the  following:  niy  signifies  conventus,  the  congrega- 
tion according  to  its  natural  organization ;  hT\\>  signifies  convocatio, 
the  congregation  according  to  its  divine  calling  and  theocratic 
purpose.  The  use  of  the  two  words  in  the  same  verse  upsets  the 
theory  that  ^)p]  riiy.  belongs  to  the  style  of  the  original  work,  and 
TlSn'i  bnp  to  that  of  the  Jehovist.  The  rebels  appeal  to  the  calling 
of  all  Israel  to  be  the  holy  nation  of  Jehovah  (Ex.  xix.  5,  6),  and 
infer  from  this  the  equal  right  of  all  to  hold  the  priesthood,  "  leav- 
ing entirely  out  of  sight,  as  blind  selfishness  is  accustomed  to  do, 
the  transition  of  the  universal  priesthood  into  the  special  mediatorial 


CHAP  XVI.  4-17.  107 

office  and  priesthood  of  Moses  and  Aaron,  which  had  their  founda- 
tion in  fact"  (Baumgarten)  ;  or  altogether  overlooking  the  fact  that 
God  Himself  had  chosen  Moses  and  Aaron,  and  appointed  them  as 
mediators  between  Himself  and  the  congregation,  to  educate  the 
sinful  nation  into  a  holy  nation,  and  train  it  to  the  fulfilment  of  its 
proper  vocation.  The  rebels,  on  the  contrary,  thought  that  they 
were  holy  already,  because  God  had  called  them  to  be  a  holy  nation, 
and  in  their  carnal  self-righteousness  forgot  the  condition  attached 
to  their  calling,  "  If  ye  will  obey  My  voice  indeed,  and  keep  My 
covenant"  (Ex.  xix.  5). 

Vers.  4-17.  When  Moses  heard  these  words  of  the  rebels,  he 
fell  upon  his  face,  to  complain  of  the  matter  to  the  Lord,  as  in 
chap.  xiv.  5.  He  then  said  to  Korah  and  his  company,  "  To-mor- 
row Jehovah  will  show  who  is  His  and  holy,  and  will  let  him  come 
near  to  Him,  and  he  whom  He  chooseth  will  draw  near  to  Him^ 
The  meaning  of  S^  ^K'K  is  evident  from  i3  inn)  1^'k.  He  is  Je- 
hovah's, whom  He  chooses,  so  that  He  belongs  to  Him  with  his 
whole  life.  The  reference  is  to  the  priestly  rank,  to  which  God  had 
chosen  Aaron  and  his  sons  out  of  the  whole  nation,  and  sanctified 
them  by  a  special  consecration  (Ex.  xxviii.  1,  xxix.  1  ;  Lev.  viii.  12, 
30),  and  by  which  they  became  the  persons  "  standing  near  to  Him" 
(Lev.  X.  3),  and  were  qualified  to  appear  before  Him  in  the  sanc- 
tuary, and  present  to  Him  the  sacrifices  of  the  nation. — Ver.  6.  To 
leave  the  decision  of  this  to  the  Lord,  Korah  and  his  company,  who 
laid  claim  to  this  prerogative,  were  to  take  censers,  and  bring  lighted 
incense  before  Jehovah.  He  whom  the  Lord  should  choose  was  to 
be  the  sanctified  one.  This  was  to  satisfy  them.  With  the  ex- 
pression ^9t  "^  ^^  ^^^'  '7>  Moses  gives  the  rebels  back  their  own 
words  in  ver.  3.  The  divine  decision  was  connected  with  the  offer- 
ing of  incense,  because  this  was  the  holiest  function  of  the  priestly 
service,  which  brought  the  priest  into  the  immediate  presence  of 
God,  and  in  connection  with  which  Jehovah  had  already  shown  to 
the  whole  congregation  how  He  sanctified  Himself,  by  a  penal 
judgment  on  those  who  took  this  office  upon  themselves  without  a 
divine  call  (Lev.  x.  1-3).  Vers.  8  sqq.  He  then  set  before  them 
the  wickedness  of  their  enterprise,  to  lead  them  to  search  them- 
selves, and  avert  the  judgment  which  threatened  them.  In  doing 
this,  he  made  a  distinction  between  Korah  the  Levite,  and  Dathan 
and  Abiram  the  Reubenites,  according  to  the  difference  in  the 
motives  which  prompted  their  rebellion,  and  the  claims  which  they 
asserted.     He  first  of  all  (vers.  8-11)  reminded  Korah  the  Levite 


108 


THE  FOUETH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


of  the  way  in  which  God  had  distinguished  his  tribe,  by  separating 
the  Levites  from  the  rest  of  the  congregation,  to  attend  to  the  ser- 
vice of  the  sanctuary  (chap.  iii.  5  sqq.,  viii.  6  sqq.),  and  asked  him, 
"  Is  this  too  little  for  you  ?  The  God  of  Israel  (this  epithet  is  used 
emphatically  for  Jehovah)  has  brought  thee  near  to  Himself  and  all 
thy  brethren  the  sons  of  Levi  with  thee,  and  ye  strive  after  the  priest- 
hood also.  Therefore  .  .  .  thou  and  thy  company,  who  have  leagued 
themselves  against  Jehovah : . . .  and  Aaron,  what  is  he,  that  ye  murmur 
against  him  ?"  These  last  words,  as  an  expression  of  wrath,  are 
elliptical,  or  rather  an  aposiopesis,  and  are  to  be  filled  up  in  the 
following  manner :  "  Therefore,  ...  as  Jehovah  has  distinguished 
you  in  this  manner,  .  .  .  what  do  ye  want  ?  Ye  rebel  against  Je- 
kovah  !  why  do  ye  murmur  against  Aaron  ?  He  has  not  seized  upon 
the  priesthood  of  his  own  accord,  but  Jehovah  has  called  him  to  it, 
and  he  is  only  a  feeble  servant  of  God"  (cf.  Ex.  xvi.  7).  Moses 
then  (vers.  12-14)  sent  for  Dathan  and  Abiram,  who,  as  is  tacitly 
assumed,  had  gone  back  to  their  tents  during  the  warning  given  to 
Korah.  But  they  replied,  "  We  shall  not  come  upV  npj^,  to  go  up, 
is  used  either  with  reference  to  the  tabernacle,  as  being  in  a  spiritual 
sense  the  culminating  point  of  the  entire  camp,  or  with  reference 
to  appearance  before  Moses,  the  head  and  ruler  of  the  nation. 
"  Is  it  too  little  that  thou  hast  brought  us  out  of  a  land  flowing  with 
milk  and  honey  (they  apply  this  expression  in  bitter  irony  to  Egypt), 
to  kill  us  in  the  wilderness  (deliver  us  up  to  death),  that  thou  wilt  be 
always  playing  the  lord  over  us  f"  The  idea  of  continuance,  which 
is  implied  in  the  inf.  abs.,  "»'?.^^^',  from  "T]^,  to  exalt  one's  self  as 
ruler  (Ges.  §  131,  36),  is  here  still  further  intensified  by  02.  "  More- 
over, thou  hast  not  brought  us  into  a  land  flowing  ivith  milk  and 
honey,  or  given  us  fields  and  vineyards  for  an  inheritance  (i.e.  thou 
hast  not  kept  thy  promise,  Ex.  iv.  30  compared  with  chap.  iii.  7 
sqq.).  Wilt  thou  put  out  the  eyes  of  these  people?"  i.e.  wilt  thou 
blind  them  as  to  thy  doings  and  designs? — Ver.  15.  Moses  was  so 
disturbed  by  these  scornful  reproaches,  that  he  entreated  the  Lord, 
with  an  asertion  of  his  own  unselfishness,  not  to  have  respect  to  their 
gift,  i.e.  not  to  accept  the  sacrifice  which  they  should  bring  (cf. 
Gen.  iv.  4).  '^  I  have  not  taken  one  ass  from  them,  nor  done  harm  to 
one  of  them,"  i.e.  I  have  not  treated  them  as  a  ruler,  who  demands 
tribute  of  his  subjects,  and  oppresses  them  (cf.  1  Sam.  xii.  3). — 
Vers.  16,  17.  In  conclusion,  he  summoned  Korah  and  his  associates 
once  more,  to  present  themselves  the  following  day  before  Jehovah 
with  censers  and  incense. 


CHAP.  XVI.  18-35.  109 

Vers.  18-35.  The  next  day  the  rebels  presented  themselves  with 
censers  before  the  tabernacle,  along  with  Moses  and  Aaron ;  and 
the  whole  congregation  also  assembled  there  at  the  instigation  of 
Korah.  The  Lord  then  interposed  in  judgment.  Appearing  in 
His  glory  to  the  whole  congregation  (just  as  in  chap.  xiv.  10),  He 
said  to  Moses  and  Aaron,  "  Separate  yourselves  from  this  congrega- 
tion ;  I  will  destroy  them  in  a  moment^  By  assembling  in  front  of 
the  tabernacle,  the  whole  congregation  had  made  common  cause 
with  the  rebels.  God  threatened  them,  therefore,  with  sudden  de- 
struction. But  the  two  men  of  God,  who  were  so  despised  by  the 
rebellious  faction,  fell  on  their  faces,  interceding  with  God,  and 
praying,  "  God^  Thou  God  of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh  !  this  one  man 
(i.e.  Korah,  the  author  of  the  conspiracy)  hath  sinned,  and  wilt  Thoxt 
he  wrathful  icith  all  the  congregation  ?"  i.e.  let  Thine  anger  fall  upon 
the  whole  congregation.  The  Creator  and  Preserver  of  all  beings, 
who  has  given  and  still  gives  life  and  breath  to  all  flesh,  is  God  of 
the  spirits  of  all  flesh.  As  the  author  of  the  spirit  of  life  in  all 
perishable  flesh,  God  cannot  destroy  His  own  creatures  in  wrath ; 
this  would  be  opposed  to  His  own  paternal  love  and  mercy.  In 
this  epithet,  as  applied  to  God,  therefore,  Moses  appeals  "  to  the 
universal  blessing  of  creation.  It  is  of  little  consequence  whether 
these  words  are  to  be  understood  as  relating  to  all  the  animal  king- 
dom, or  to  the  human  race  alone ;  because  Moses  simply  prayed, 
that  as  God  was  the  creator  and  architect  of  the  world.  He  would 
not  destroy  the  men  whom  He  had  created,  but  rather  have  mercy 
upon  the  works  of  His  own  hands"  (Calvin).  The  intercession 
of  the  prophet  Isaiah,  in  Isa.  Ixiv.  8,  is  similar  to  this,  though 
that  is  founded  upon  the  special  relation  in  which  God  stood  to 
Israel. — Vers.  23  sqq.  Jehovah  then  instructed  Moses,  that  the 
congregation  was  to  remove  away  (J^'^,  to  get  up  and  away)  from 
about  the  dwelling-place  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram  ;  and,  as 
we  may  supply  from  the  context,  the  congregation  fell  back  from 
Korah's  tent,  whilst  Dathan  and  Abiram,  possibly  at  the  very  first 
appearance  of  the  divine  glory,  drew  back  into  their  tents.  Moses 
therefore  betook  himself  to  the  tents  of  Dathan  and  Abiram,  with 
the  elders  following  him,  and  there  also  commanded  the  congrega- 
tion to  depart  from  the  tents  of  these  wicked  men,  and  not  touch 
anything  they  possessed,  that  they  might  not  be  swept  away  in  all 
their  sins. — Ver.  27.  The  congregation  obeyed ;  but  Dathan  and 
Abiram  came  and  placed  themselves  in  front  of  the  tents,  along 
with  their  wives  and  children,  to  see  what  Moses  would  do.     Moses 


110  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

then  announced  the  sentence  :  "  By  this  shall  ye  know  that  Jehovah 
hath  sent  me  to  do  all  these  works,  that  not  out  of  my  own  heart  (i.e. 
that  I  do  not  act  of  my  own  accord).  If  these  men  die  like  all  men 
(i.e.  if  these  wicked  men  die  a  natural  death  like  other  men),  and 
the  oversight  of  all  men  take  place  over  them  (i.e.  if  the  same  provi- 
dence watches  over  them  as  over  all  other  men,  and  preserves  them 
from  sudden  death),  Jehovah  hath  not  sent  me.  But  if  Jehovah  create 
a  creation  (njj''"il  i^'JS,  i.e.  work  an  extraordinary  miracle),  and  the 
earth  open  its  mouth  and  swallow  them  up,  with  all  that  belongs  to  them, 
so  that  they  go  down  alive  into  hell,  ye  shall  perceive  that  these  men  have 
despised  Jehovah." — Vers.  31—33.  And  immediately  the  earth  clave 
asunder,  and  swallowed  them  up,  with  their  families  and  all  their 
possessions,  and  closed  above  them,  so  that  they  perished  without  a 
trace  from  the  congregation.  Drii<  refers  to  the  three  ringleaders. 
"  Their  houses ;"  i.e.  their  families,  not  their  tents,  as  in  chap,  xviii. 
31,  Ex.  xii.  3.  "  All  the  men  belonging  to  Korah"  were  his  servants ; 
for,  according  to  chap.  xxvi.  11,  his  sons  did  not  perish  with  him, 
but  perpetuated  his  family  (chap.  xxvi.  58),  to  which  the  celebrated 
Korahite  singers  of  David's  time  belonged  (1  Chron.  vi.  18-22,  ix. 
19). — ^Ver.  34.  This  fearful  destruction  of  the  ringleaders,  through 
which  Jehovah  glorified  Moses  afresh  as  His  servant  in  a  miraculous 
way,  filled  all  the  Israelites  round  about  with  such  terror,  that  they 
fled  D7pp,  "  at  their  noise,"  i.e.  at  the  commotion  with  which  the 
wicked  men  went  down  into  the  abyss  which  opened  beneath  their 
feet,  lest,  as  they  said,  the  earth  should  swallow  them  up  also. — 
Ver.  35.  The  other  250  rebels,  who  were  probably  still  in  front  of 
the  tabernacle,  were  then  destroyed  by  fire  which  proceeded  from 
Jehovah,  as  Nadab  and  Abihu  had  been  before  (Lev.  x.  2). 

Vers.  36-40  (or  xvii.  1-5).  After  the  destruction  of  the  sinners, 
the  Lord  commanded  that  Eleazar  should  take  up  the  censers 
"  from  between  the  burning,"  i.e.  from  the  midst  of  the  men  that  had 
been  burned,  and  scatter  the  fire  (the  burning  coals  in  the  pans) 
far  away,  that  it  might  not  be  used  any  more.  "  For  they  (the 
censers)  are  holy ;"  that  is  to  say,  they  had  become  holy  through 
being  brought  before  Jehovah  (ver.  39)  ;  and  therefore,  when  the 
men  who  brought  them  were  slain,  they  fell  as  banned  articles  to 
the  Lord  (Lev.  xxvii.  28).  "  The  censers  of  these  sinners  against 
their  souls"  (i.e.  the  men  who  have  forfeited  their  lives  through 
their  sin  :  cf.  Prov.  xx.  2,  Hab.  ii.  10),  "  let  them  make  into  broad 
plates  for  a  covering  to  the  altar"  (of  burnt-offering).  Through  this 
application  of  them  they  became  a  sign,  or,  according  to  ver.  39, 


CHAP.  XVI.  41-50.  Ill 

a  memorial  to  all  who  drew  near  to  the  sanctuary,  which  was  to 
remind  them  continually  of  this  judgment  of  God,  and  warn  the 
congregation  of  grasping  at  the  priestly  prerogatives.  The  words, 
'l)'?!  ^''1,  in  ver.  40,  introduce  the  predicate  in  the  form  of  an  apo- 
dosis  to  the  subject,  which  is  written  absolutely,  and  consists  of  an 
entire  sentence.  >^l\}  with  ^  signifies,  "  to  experience  the  same  fate 
as"  another. 

Punishment  of  the  murmuring  Congregation,  and  Confirmation  of  the 
High-priesthood  of  Aaron. — Chap.  xvi.  41-xvii.  13  (or  chap, 
xvii.  6-28). 

Vers.  41-50.  Punishment  of  the  murmuring  Congrega- 
tion.— The  judgment  upon  the  company  of  Korah  had  filled  the 
people  round  about  with  terror  and  dismay,  but  it  had  produced  no 
change  of  heart  in  the  congregation  that  had  risen  up  against  its 
leaders.  The  next  morning  the  whole  congregation  began  to  mur- 
mur against  Moses  and  Aaron,  and  to  charge  them  with  having 
slain  the  people  of  Jehovah.  They  referred  to  Korah  and  his 
company,  but  especially  to  the  250  chiefs  of  renown,  whom  they 
regarded  as  the  kernel  of  the  nation,  and  called  "  the  people  of 
Jehovah."  They  would  have  made  Moses  and  Aaron  responsible 
for  their  death,  because  in  their  opinion  it  was  they  who  had  brought 
the  judgment  upon  their  leaders ;  whereas  it  was  through  the  in- 
tercession of  Moses  (chap.  xvi.  22)  that  the  whole  congregation 
was  saved  from  the  destruction  which  threatened  it.  To  such  an 
extent  does  the  folly  of  the  proud  heart  of  man  proceed,  and  the 
obduracy  of  a  race  already  exposed  to  the  judgment  of  God. — 
Ver.  7.  When  the  congregation  assembled  together,  Moses  and 
Aaron  turned  to  the  tabernacle,  and  saw  how  the  cloud  covered  it, 
and  the  glory  of  the  Lord  appeared.  As  the  cloud  rested  continu- 
ally above  the  tabernacle  during  the  time  of  encampment  (chap, 
ix.  18  sqq. ;  Ex.  xl.  38),  we  must  suppose  that  at  this  time  the  cloud 
covered  it  in  a  fuller  and  much  more  conspicuous  sense,  just  as  it 
had  done  when  the  tabernacle  was  first  erected  (chap.  ix.  15 ;  Ex.  xl. 
34),  and  that  at  the  same  time  the  glory  of  God  burst  forth  from 
the  dark  cloud  in  a  miraculous  splendour. — Vers.  8  sqq.  There- 
upon they  both  went  into  the  court  of  (''.:3a  i^N,  as  in  Lev.  ix.  5)  the  . 
tabernacle,  and  God  commanded  them  to  rise  up  (^is^n,  Niphal 
of  DD-)  =  nr) ;  see  Ges,  §  65,  Anm.  5)  out  of  this  congregation, 
which  He  would  immediately  destroy.  But  they  fell  upon  their 
faces  in  prayer,  as  in  cliap.  xvi.  21,  22.     This  time,  however,  they 


112  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

could  not  avert  the  bursting  forth  of  the  wrathful  judgment,  as  they 
had  done  the  day  before  (chap.  xvi.  22).  The  plague  had  already 
commenced,  when  Moses  told  Aaron  to  take  the  censer  quickly  into 
the  midst  of  the  congregation,  with  coals  and  incense  (^.<^''',  imper. 
HipJi.),  to  make  expiation  for  it  with  an  incense-offering.  And  when 
this  was  done,  and  Aaron  placed  himself  between  the  dead  and  the 
living,  the  plague,  which  had  already  destroyed  14,700  men,  was 
stayed.  The  plague  consisted  apparently  of  a  sudden  death,  as  in 
the  case  of  a  pestilence  raging  with  extreme  violence,  though  we 
cannot  regard  it  as  an  actual  pestilence. 

The  means  resorted  to  by  Moses  to  stay  the  plague  showed  afresh 
how  the  faithful  servant  of  God  bore  the  rescue  of  his  people  upon 
his  heart.  All  the  motives  which  he  had  hitherto  pleaded,  in  his 
repeated  intercession  that  this  evil  congregation  might  be  spared, 
were  now  exhausted.  He  could  not  stake  his  life  for  the  nation, 
as  at  Horeb  (Ex.  xxxii.  32),  for  the  nation  had  rejected  him.  He 
could  no  longer  appeal  to  the  honour  of  Jeliovah  among  the  heathen, 
seeing  that  the  Lord,  even  when  sentencing  the  rebellious  race  to 
fall  in  the  desert,  had  assured  him  that  the  whole  earth  should  be 
filled  with  His  glory  (chap.  xiv.  20  sqq.).  Still  less  could  he  pray 
to  God  that  He  would  not  be  wrathful  with  all  for  the  sake  of  one 
or  a  few  sinners,  as  in  chap.  xvi.  22,  seeing  that  the  whole  congre- 
gation had  taken  part  with  the  rebels.  In  this  condition  of  things 
there  was  but  one  way  left  of  averting  the  threatened  destruction 
of  the  whole  nation,  namely,  to  adopt  the  means  which  the  Lord 
Himself  had  given  to  His  congregation,  in  the  high-priestly  office, 
to  wipe  away  their  sins,  and  recover  the  divine  grace  which  they 
had  forfeited  through  sin, — viz.  the  offering  of  incense  which  era- 
bodied  the  high-priestly  prayer,  and  the  strength  and  operation  of 
which  were  not  dependent  upon  the  sincerity  and  earnestness  of 
subjective  faith,  but  had  a  firm  and  immovable  foundation  in  the 
objective  force  of  the  divine  appointment.  This  was  the  means 
adopted  by  the  faithful  servant  of  the  Lord,  and  the  judgment  of 
wrath  was  averted  in  its  course ;  the  plague  was  averted. — The 
effectual  operation  of  the  incense-offering  of  the  high  priest  also 
served  to  furnish  the  people  with  a  practical  proof  of  the  power  and 
operation  of  the  true  and  divinely  appointed  priesthood.  "  The 
priesthood  which  the  company  of  Korah  had  so  wickedly  usurped, 
had  brought  down  death  and  destruction  upon  himself,  through  his 
offering  of  incense ;  but  the  divinely  appointed  priesthood  of  Aaron 
averted  death  and  destruction  from  the  whole  concrreiration  when 


I 


I 


I 


CHAP.  XVII.  1-13,  113 

incense  was  offered  by  him,  and  stayed  the  well-merited  judgment, 
which  had  broken  forth  upon  it"  (Kurtz). 

Chap.  xvii.  1-13  (or  chap.  xvii.  16-28).  Confirmation  of 
THE  High-priesthood  of  Aaron. — Whilst  the  Lord  had  thus 
given  a  practical  proof  to  the  people,  that  Aaron  was  the  high 
priest  appointed  by  Him  for  His  congregation,  by  allowing  the 
high-priestly  incense  offered  by  Aaron  to  expiate  His  wrath,  and  by 
removing  the  plague ;  He  also  gave  them  a  still  further  confirma- 
tion of  His  priesthood,  by  a  miracle  which  was  well  adapted  to  put 
to  silence  all  the  murmuring  of  the  congregation. — Vers.  16-20. 
He  commanded  Moses  to  take  twelve  rods  of  the  tribe-princes 
of  Israel,  one  for  the  fathers'  house  of  each  of  their  tribes,  and 
to  write  upon  each  the  name  of  the  tribe ;  but  upon  that  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi  he  was  to  write  Aaron's  name,  because  each  rod  was 
to  stand  for  the  head  of  their  fathers'  houses,  i.e,  for  the  existing 
head  of  the  tribe ;  and  in  the  case  of  Levi,  the  tribe-head  was  Aaron. 
As  only  twelve  rods  were  taken  for  all  the  tribes  of  Israel,  and 
Levi  was  included  among  them,  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  must 
have  been  reckoned  as  the  one  tribe  of  Joseph,  as  in  Deut.  xxvii. 
12.  These  rods  were  to  be  laid  by  Moses  in  the  tabernacle  before 
the  testimony,  or  ark  of  the  covenant  (Ex.  xxv.  21,  xxix.  42). 
And  there  the  rod  of  the  man  whom  Jehovah  chose,  i.e,  entrusted 
with  the  priesthood  (see  chap.  xvi.  5),  would  put  forth  shoots,  to 
quiet  the  murmuring  of  the  people.  "H?^,  Hiph.,  to  cause  to  sink,  to 
bring  to  rest,  construed  with  pV^  in  a  pregnant  signification,  to 
quiet  in  such  a  way  that  it  will  not  rise  again. — Vers.  6-9.  Moses 
carried  out  this  command.  And  when  he  went  into  the  tabernacle 
the  following  morning,  behold  Aaron's  rod  of  the  house  of  Levi 
had  sprouted,  and  put  forth  shoots,  and  had  borne  blossoms  and 
matured  almonds.  And  Moses  brought  all  the  rods  out  of  the 
sanctuary,  and  gave  every  man  his  own ;  the  rest,  as  we  may 
gather  from  the  context,  being  all  unchanged,  so  that  the  whole 
nation  could  satisfy  itself  that  God  had  chosen  Aaron.  Thus  was 
the  word  fulfilled  which  Moses  had  spoken  at  the  commencement 
of  the  rebellion  of  the  company  of  Korah  (chap.  xvi.  5),  and  that 
in  a  way  which  could  not  fail  to  accredit  him  before  the  whole 
congregation  as  sent  of  God. 

So  far  as  the  occurrence  itself  is  concerned,  there  can  hardly 
be  any  need  to  remark,  that  the  natural  interpretation  which  has 
lately  been  attempted  by  Ewald,  viz.  that  Moses  had  laid  several 
pent. — VOL.  III.  n 


114  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

almond  rods  in  the  holy  place,  which  had  just  been  freshly  cut 
off,  that  he  might  see  the  next  day  which  of  them  would  flower 
the  best  during  the  night,  is  directly  at  variance  with  the  words  of 
the  text,  and  also  with  the  fact,  that  a  rod  even  freshly  cut  off, 
when  laid  in  a  dry  place,  would  not  bear  ripe  fruit  in  a  single 
night.  The  miracle  which  God  wrought  here  as  the  Creator  of 
nature,  was  at  the  same  time  a  significant  symbol  of  the  nature  and 
meaning  of  the  priesthood.  The  choice  of  the  rods  had  also  a  bear- 
ing upon  the  object  in  question.  A  man's  rod  was  the  sign  of  his 
position  as  ruler  in  the  house  and  congregation  ;  with  a  prince  the 
rod  becomes  a  sceptre,  the  insignia  of  rule  (Gen.  xlix.  10).  As  a 
severed  branch,  the  rod  could  not  put  forth  shoots  and  blossom  in 
a  natural  way.  But  God  could  impart  new  vital  powers  even  to 
the  dry  rod.  And  so  Aaron  had  naturally  no  pre-eminence  above 
the  heads  of  the  other  tribes.  But  the  priesthood  was  founded  not 
upon  natural  qualifications  and  gifts,  but  iipon  the  power  of  the 
Spirit,  which  God  communicates  according  to  the  choice  of  His 
wisdom,  and  which  He  had  imparted  to  Aaron  through  his  consecra- 
tion with  holy  anointing  oil.  It  was  this  which  the  Lord  intended 
to  show  to  the  people,  by  causing  Aaron's  rod  to  put  forth  branches, 
blossom,  and  fruit,  through  a  miracle  of  His  omnipotence  ;  whereas 
the  rods  of  the  other  heads  of  the  tribes  remained  as  barren  as 
before.  In  this  way,  therefore,  it  w^as  not  without  deep  signifi- 
cance that  Aaron's  rod  not  only  put  forth  shoots,  by  which  the 
divine  election  might  be  recognised,  but  bore  even  blossom  and  ripe 
fruit.  This  showed  that  Aaron  was  not  only  qualified  for  his  call- 
ing, but  administered  his  office  in  the  full  power  of  the  Spirit,  and 
bore  the  fruit  expected  of  him.  The  almond  rod  was  especially 
adapted  to  exhibit  this,  as  an  almond-tree  flowers  and  bears  fruit 
the  earliest  of  all  the  trees,  and  has  received  its  name  of  ^i?.ti^, 
"awake,"  from  this  very  fact  (cf.  Jer.  i.  11). 

God  then  commanded  (vers.  10,  11)  that  Aaron's  rod  should  be 
taken  back  into  the  sanctuary,  and  preserved  before  the  testimony, 
"/or  a  sign  for  the  rebelliouSy  that  thouputtest  an  end  to  their  murmur- 
ing, and  they  die  not^  The  preservation  of  the  rod  before  the  ark 
of  the  covenant,  in  the  immediate  presence  of  the  Lord,  was  a  pledge 
to  Aaron  of  the  continuance  of  his  election,  and  the  permanent 
duration  of  his  priesthood  ;  though  we  have  no  need  to  assume,  that 
through  a  perpetual  miracle  the  staff  continued  green  and  blossom- 
ing. In  this  way  the  staff  became  a  sign  to  the  rebellious,  which 
could  not  fail  to  stop  their  murmuring. — Vers.  12, 13.  This  miracle 


I 


CHAP.  XVIII.  1-7.  115 

awakened  a  salutary  terror  in  all  the  people,  so  that  they  cried  oiit 
to  Moses  in  mortal  anguish,  ''  Behold,  we  die,  we  perish,  we  all 
perish  !  Every  one  who  comes  near  to  the  dwelling  of  Jehovah  dies  ; 
are  we  all  to  die  ? "  Even  if  this  fear  of  death  was  no  fruit  of 
faith,  it  was  fitted  for  all  that  to  prevent  any  fresh  outbreaks  of 
rebelHon  on  the  part  of  the  rejected  generation. 

Service  and  Revenues  of  the  Priests  and  Levites. — Chap,  xviii. 

The  practical  confirmation  of  the  priesthood  of  Aaron  and  his 
family,  on  the  part  of  God,  is  very  appropriately  followed  by  the 
legal  regulations  concerning  the  official  duties  of  the  priests  and 
Levites  (vers.  1-7),  and  the  revenues  to  be  assigned  them  for  their 
services  (vers.  8-32),  as  the  laws  hitherto  given  upon  this  subject, 
although  they  contain  many  isolated  stipulations,  have  not  laid 
down  any  complete  and  comprehensive  arrangement.  The  instruc- 
tions relating  to  this  subject  were  addressed  by  Jehovah  directly  to 
Aaron  (see  vers.  1  and  8),  up  to  the  law,  that  out  of  the  tenths 
which  the  Levites  were  to  collect  from  the  people,  they  were  to 
pay  a  tenth  again  to  the  priests ;  and  this  was  addressed  to  Moses 
(ver.  2b),  as  the  head  of  all  Israel. 

Vers.  1-7.  The  Official  Duties  and  Rights  of  the  Priests 
AND  Levites. — Ver.  1.  To  impress  upon  the  minds  of  the  priests 
and  Levites  the  holiness  and  responsibility  of  their  office,  the  service 
of  Aaron,  of  his  sons,  and  of  his  father's  house,  i.e,  of  the  family  of 
the  Kohathites,  is  described  as  "  bearing  the  iniquity  of  the  sanctu- 
ary," and  the  service  which  was  peculiar  to  the  Aaronides,  as  "  bear- 
ing the  iniquity  of  their  priesthood."  "  To  hear  the  iniquity  of  the 
sanctuary "  signifies  not  only  "  to  have  to  make  expiation  for  all 
that  offended  against  the  laws  of  the  priests  and  the  holy  things,  Le, 
the  desecration  of  these"  (Knobet),  but  "  iniquity  or  transgression 
at  the  sanctuary,"  i.e.  the  defilement  of  it  by  the  sin  of  those  who 
drew  near  to  the  sanctuary  ;  not  only  of  the  priests  and  Levites,  but 
of  the  whole  people  who  defiled  the  sanctuary  in  the  midst  of  them 
with  its  holy  vessels,  not  only  by  their  sins  (Lev.  xvi.  6),  but  eveu 
by  their  holy  gifts  (Ex.  xxviii.  38),  and  thus  brought  guilt  upon> 
the  whole  congregation,  which  the  priests  were  to  bear,  i.e.  to  take^ 
upon  themselves  and  expunge,  by  virtue  of  the  holiness  and  sancti- 
fying power  communicated  to  their  office  (see  at  Ex.  xxviii.  38). 
The  "  iniquity  of  the  priesthood,"  however,  not  on)y  embraced 
every  offence  against  the  priesthood,  every  neglect  of  the  mofi 


11{)  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


scrupulous  and  conscientious  fulfilment  of  duty  in  connection  with 
their  office,  but  extended  to  all  the  sin  which  attached  to  the 
official  acts  of  the  priests,  on  account  of  the  sinfulness  of  their 
nature.  It  was  to  wipe  out  these  sins  and  defilements,  that  the 
annual  expiation  of  the  holy  things  on  the  day  of  atonement  had 
been  appointed  (Lev.  xvi.  16  sqq.).  The  father's  house  of  Aaron, 
i,e,  the  Levitical  family  of  Kohath,  was  also  to  join  in  bearing  the 
iniquity  of  the  sanctuary,  because  the  oversight  of  the  holy  vessels 
of  the  sanctuary  devolved  upon  it  (chap.  iv.  4  sqq.). — Vers.  2-4. 
Aaron  was  also  to  bring  his  (other)  brethren  {sc.  to  the  sanctuary), 
viz.  the  tribe  of  Levi,  that  is  to  say,  the  Gershonites  and  Merarites, 
that  they  might  attach  themselves  to  him  and  serve  him,  both  him 
(nnt<l)  and  his  sons,  before  the  tent  of  testimony,  and  discharge  the  fll 
duties  that  were  binding  upon  them,  according  to  chap.  iv.  24  sqq., 
31  sqq.  (cf.  chap.  iii.  6,  7,  viii.  26).  Only  they  were  not  to  come 
near  to  the  holy  vessels  and  the  altar,  for  that  would  bring  death 
both  upon  them  and  the  priests  (see  at  chap.  iv.  15).  On  ver.  4, 
cf.  chap.  i.  53  and  iii.  7. — Vers.  5-7.  The  charge  of  the  sanctuary 
(i.e.  the  dwelling)  and  the  altar  (of  burnt-offering)  devolved  upon 
Aaron  and  his  sons,  that  the  wrath  of  God  might  not  come  again 
upon  the  children  of  Israel  (see  chap.  viii.  19), — namely,  through 
such  illegal  acts  as  Nadab  and  Abihu  (Lev.  x.  2),  and  the  com- 
pany of  Korah  (chap.  xvi.  35),  had  committed.  To  this  end  God 
had  handed  over  the  Levites  to  them  as  a  gift,  to  be  their  assistants 
(see  at  chap.  iii.  9  and  viii.  16,  19).  But  Aaron  and  his  sons  were 
to  attend  to  the  priesthood  "  with  regard  to  everything  of  the  altar 
and  within  the  vaiV^  (i.e.  of  the  most  holy  place,  see  Lev.  xvi.  12). 
The  allusion  is  to  all  the  priestly  duties  from  the  altar  of  burnt- 
offering  to  the  most  holy  place,  including  the  holy  place  which  lay 
between.  This  office,  which  brought  them  into  the  closest  fellow- 
ship with  the  Lord,  was  a  favour  accorded  to  them  by  the  grace  of 
God.  This  is  expressed  in  the  words,  "  as  a  service  of  gift  (a  ser- 
vice with  which  I  present  you)  I  give  you  the  priesthoodJ*  The 
last  words  in  ver.  7  are  the  same  as  in  chap.  i.  51 ;  and  "  stranger  " 
(zar)j  as  in  Lev.  xxii.  10. 

Vers.  8-20.  The  Kevenues  of  the  Peiests. — These  are 
summed  up  in  ver.  8  in  these  words,  "  /  give  thee  the  keeping  of  My 
heave-offerings  in  all  holy  gifts  for  a  portion^  as  an  eternal  statute^ 
The  notion  of  ^"^.^^P,  keeping,  as  in  Ex.  xii.  6,  xvi.  23,  32,  is  defined 
in  the  second  parallel  clause  as  »^n^?,  a  portion  (see  at  Lev.  vii.  35). 


CHAP.  XVIII.  8-20.  117 

The  priests  were  to  keep  all  the  heave-offerings,  as  the  portion 
which  belonged  to  them,  out  of  the  sacrificial  gifts  that  the  children 
of  Israel  offered  to  the  Lord.  Dbnn^  heave-offerings  (see  at  Ex. 
XXV.  2,  and  Lev.  ii.  9),  is  used  here  in  the  broadest  sense,  as  in- 
cluding all  the  holy  gifts  (kodashim,  see  Lev.  xxi.  22)  which  the 
Israelites  lifted  off  from  their  possessions  and  presented  to  the  Lord 
(as  in  chap.  v.  9).  Among  these,  for  example,  were,  first  of  all, 
the  most  holy  gifts  in  the  meat-offerings,  sin-offerings,  and  trespass- 
offerings  (vers.  9,  10 ;  see  at  Lev.  ii.  3).  The  burnt-offerings  are 
not  mentioned,  because  the  whole  of  the  flesh  of  these  was  burned 
upon  the  altar,  and  the  skin  alone  fell  to  the  portion  of  the  piiest 
(Lev.  vii.  8).  '^  From  the  fire,"  sc,  of  the  altar.  tJ'^5,  fire,  is 
equivalent  to  nts^5^,  firing  (see  Lev.  i.  9).  These  gifts  they  were  to 
eat,  as  most  holy,  in  a  most  holy  place,  i.e,  in  the  court  of  the 
tabernacle  (see  Lev.  vi.  9,  19,  vii.  6),  which  is  called  "  most  hohf 
here,  to  lay  a  stronger  emphasis  upon  the  precept.  In  the  second 
place,  these  gifts  included  also  "  iAe  holy  gifts;"  viz.  (a)  (ver.  11) 
the  heave-offering  of  their  gifts  in  all  wave-offerings  (tenuphoth), 
i.e.  the  wave-breast  and  heave-leg  of  the  peace-offerings,  and  what- 
ever else  was  waved  in  connection  with  the  sacrifices  (see  at  Lev. 
vii.  33)  :  these  might  be  eaten  by  both  the  male  and  female 
members  of  the  priestly  families,  provided  they  were  legally  clean 
(Lev.  xxii.  3  sqq.)  ;  (b)  (ver.  12)  the  gifts  of  first-fruits :  "  all  the 
fat  (i.e.  the  best,  as  in  Gen.  xlv.  18)  of  oil,  new  wine,  and  com," 
viz.  QTOXn,  ''the  first  of  them,"  the  0^1^32,  '' the  first-grown  fruits" 
of  the  land,  and  that  of  all  the  fruit  of  the  ground  (Deut.  xxvi. 
2,  10 ;  Prov.  iii.  9  ;  Ezek.  xliv.  30),  com,  wine,  oil,  honey,  and 
tree-fruit  (Deut.  viii.  8,  compared  with  Lev.  xix.  23,  24),  which 
were  offered,  according  to  2  Chron.  xxxi.  5,  Neh.  x.  36,  38,  Tob.  i. 
6,  as  first-fruits  every  year  (see  Mishnah,  Bikkur,  i.  3,  10,  where  the 
first-fruits  are  specified  according  to  the  productions  mentioned  in 
Deut.  viii.  8  ;  the  law  prescribed  nothing  in  relation  to  the  quantity 
of  the  different  first-fruits,  but  left  this  entirely  to  the  offerer  him- 
self) ;  (c)  (ver.  14)  everything  placed  under  a  ban  (see  at  Lev. 
xxvii.  28)  ;  and  {d)  (vers.  15-18)  the  first-born  of  man  and  beast. 
The  first-born  of  men  and  of  unclean  beasts  were  redeemed  accord- 
ing to  chap.  iii.  47,  Ex.  xiii.  12,  13,  and  Lev.  xxvii.  6,  27  ;  but 
such  as  were  fit  for  sacrifice  were  actually  offered,  the  blood  being 
swung  against  the  altar,  and  the  fat  portions  burned  upon  it,  whilst 
the  whole  of  the  flesh  fell  to  the  portion  of  the  priests.  So  far  as 
the  redemption  of  human  beings  was  concerned  (ver.  16),  they  were 


118  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

"  to  redeem  from  the  monthly  childy^  i.e.  the  first-born  child  as  soon 
as  it  was  a  month  old. — Yer.  19.  "  All  the  holy  heave-offerings^^  are 
not  the  thank-offerings  (Knohel),  but,  as  in  ver.  8,  all  the  holy  gifts 
enumerated  in  vers.  9-18.  Jehovah  gives  these  to  the  priests  as  an 
eternal  claim.  "  An  eternal  covenant  of  salt  is  this  before  Jehovah,^ 
for  Aaron  and  his  descendants.  A  "  covenant  of  salt ;"  equivalent 
to  an  indissoluble  covenant,  or  inviolable  contract  (see  at  Lev.  ii. 
13). — Yer.  20.  For  this  reason,  Aaron  was  to  receive  no  inheritance 
in  the  land  among  the  children  of  Israel.  Aaron,  as  the  liead  of 
the  priests,  represents  the  whole  priesthood ;  and  with  regard  to  the 
possession,  the  whole  tribe  of  Levi  is  placed,  in  ver.  23,  on  an 
equality  with  the  priests.  The  Levites  were  to  receive  no  portion 
of  the  land  as  an  inheritance  in  Canaan  (cf.  chap.  xxvi.  62  ;  Deut. 
xii.  12,  xiv.  27  ;  Josh.  xiv.  3).  Jehovah  was  the  portion  and 
inheritance,  not  only  of  Aaron  and  his  sons,  but  of  the  whole  tribe 
of  Levi  (cf.  Deut.  x.  9,  xviii.  2  ;  Josh.  xiii.  33)  ;  or,  as  it  is  expressed 
in  Josh,  xviii.  7,  "  the  priesthood  of  Jehovah  was  their  inheritance," 
though  not  in  the  sense  that  Knohel  supposes,  viz.  "  the  priesthood 
with  its  revenues,"  which  would  make  the  expression  "  Jehovah,  the 
God  of  Israel"  (Josh.  xiii.  33),  to  be  metonymical  for  "  sacrificial 
gifts,  first-fruits,  and  tenths."  The  possession  of  the  priests  and 
Levites  did  not  consist  in  the  revenues  assigned  to  them  by  God, 
but  in  the  possession  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel.  In  the  same 
sense  in  which  the  tribe  of  Levi  was  the  peculiar  possession  of 
Jehovah  out  of  the  whole  of  the  people  of  possession,  was  Jehovah 
also  the  peculiar  possession  of  Levi ;  and  just  as  the  other  tribes 
were  to  live  upon  what  was  afforded  by  the  land  assigned  them  as 
a  possession,  Levi  was  to  live  upon  what  Jehovah  bestowed  upon  it. 
And  inasmuch  as  not  only  the  whole  land  of  the  twelve  tribes,  with 
which  Jehovah  had  enfeoffed  them,  but  the  whole  earth,  belonged 
to  Jehovah  (Ex.  xix.  5),  He  was  necessarily  to  be  regarded  as  the 
greatest  possession  of  all,  beyond  which  nothing  greater  is  conceiv- 
able, and  in  comparison  with  which  every  other  possession  is  to  be 
regarded  as  nothing.  Hence  it  was  evidently  the  greatest  privilege 
and  highest  honour  to  have  Him  for  a  portion  and  possession 
{Bdhr,  Symbolik,  ii.  p.  44).  "  For  truly,"  as  Masius  writes  (Com. 
on  Josh.),  "  he  who  possesses  God  possesses  all  things ;  and  the 
worship  (cultus)  of  Him  is  infinitely  fuller  of  delight,  and  far  more 
productive,  than  the  cultivation  (cultus)  of  any  soil." 

Yers.  21-24.  Ke venues  of  the  Levites. — For  (^^n,  instead 


CHAP.  XVIII.  25-32.  119 

of,  for)  their  serv^ice  at  the  tabernacle  God  assigns  them  "  every 
tenth  in  Israel  as  an  inheritance.^^  On  the  tenth,  see  at  Lev.  xxvil. 
30-33.  The  institution  and  description  of  their  service  in  vers.  22 
and  23  is  the  same  as  that  in  chap.  i.  53  and  viii.  19.  "  Lest  they 
bear  sin  :"  see  at  Lev.  xix.  17. 

Vers.  25-32.  Appropriation  of  the  Tithe. — Vers.  26  sqq.  When 
the  Levites  took  (received)  from  the  people  the  tithe  assigned  them 
by  Jehovah,  they  were  to  lift  off  from  it  a  heave-offering  for 
Jehovah,  a  tithe  of  the  tithe  for  Aaron  the  priest  (i.e,  for  the 
priesthood  ;  see  at  ver.  20).  "  Your  heave-offering  shall  he  reckoned 
to  you  as  the  corn  of  the  threshing-floor,  and  the  fulness  (see  Ex.  xxii. 
28)  of  the  loine-press^^  i.e.  according  to  ver.  30,  as  the  revenue  of 
the  threshing-floor  and  wine-press  ;  that  is  to  say,  as  corn  and  wine 
which  they  had  reaped  themselves. — Ver.  29.  The  whole  of  this 
heave-offering  of  Jehovah,  i.e.  the  tithe  of  the  tithe,  they  were  to 
lift  off  from  all  their  gifts,  from  all  the  tithes  of  the  people  which 
they  received ;  "  of  all  the  fat  of  it^^  i.e.  of  all  the  best  of  the  heave- 
offering  they  received,  they  were  to  lift  off  iKnpO'HK,  "  its  holy"  i.e. 
the  holy  part,  which  was  to  be  dedicated  to  Jehovah. — Ver.  30. 
They  might  eat  it  (the  tithe  they  had  received,  after  taking  off  the 
priests'  tithe)  in  any  place  with  their  families,  as  it  was  the  reward 
for  their  service  at  the  tabernacle. — Ver.  32.  They  would  load  no 
sin  upon  themselves  by  so  doing  (see  Lev.  xix.  17),  if  they  only 
lifted  off  the  best  as  tithe  (for  the  priest),  and  did  not  desecrate 
the  holy  gifts,  sc.  by  eating  in  all  kinds  of  places,  which  was  not 
allowed,  according  to  ver.  10,  with  regard  to  the  most  holy  gifts. 

These  regulations  concerning  the  revenues  of  the  priests  and 
Levites  were  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  true  idea  of  the  Israel- 
itisli  kingdom  of  God.  Whereas  in  heathen  states,  where  there  was 
an  hereditary  priestly  caste,  that  caste  was  generally  a  rich  one,  and 
held  a  firm  possession  in  the  soil  (in  Egypt,  for  example ;  see  at  Gen. 
xlvii.  22),  the  Levites  received  no  hereditary  landed  property  in  the 
land  of  Israel,  but  only  towns  to  dwell  in  among  the  other  tribes, 
with  pasturage  for  their  cattle  (chap,  xxxv.),  because  Jehovah,  the 
God  of  Israel,  would  be  their  inheritance.  In  this  way  their  earthly 
existence  was  based  upon  the  spiritual  ground  and  soil  of  faith,  in 
accordance  with  the  calling  assigned  them,  to  be  the  guardians  and 
promoters  of  the  commandments,  statutes,  and  rights  of  Jehovah  ; 
and  their  authority  and  influence  among  the  people  were  bound  up 
with  their  unreserved  surrender  of  themselves  to  the  Lord,  and  their 
firm  reliance  upon  the  possession  of  their  God.     -Yow,  whilst  this 


120  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

position  was  to  be  a  constant  incitement  to  the  Levites  to  surrender 
themselves  entirely  to  the  Lord  and  His  seryice,  it  was  also  to  be- 
come to  the  whole  nation  a  constant  admonition,  inasmuch  as  it  was 
a  prerogative  conferred  upon  them  by  the  Lord,  to  seek  the  highest 
of  all  good  in  the  possession  of  the  Lord,  as  its  portion  and  inherit- 
ance.— The  revenue  itself,  however,  which  the  Lord  assigned  to 
the  Levites  and  priests,  as  His  servants,  consisting  of  the  tenths  and 
first-fruits,  as  well  as  certain  portions  of  the  different  sacrificial  gifts 
that  were  offered  to  Him,  appears  to  have  been  a  very  considerable 
one,  especially  if  we  adopt  the  computation  of  J".  D.  Michaelis  {Mos. 
RecliL  i.  §  52)  with  reference  to  the  tithes.  "  A  tribe,"  he  says, 
"  which  had  only  22,000  males  in  it  (23,000  afterwards),  and  there- 
fore could  hardly  have  numbered  more  than  12,000  grown-up  men, 
received  the  tithes  of  600,000  Israelites ;  consequently  one  single 
Levite,  without  the  slightest  necessity  for  sowing,  and  without  any 
of  the  expenses  of  agriculture,  reaped  or  received  from  the  produce 
of  the  flocks  and  herds  as  much  as  five  of  the  other  Israelites."  But 
this  leaves  out  of  sight  the  fact  that  tithes  are  never  paid  so  exactly 
as  this,  and  that  no  doubt  there  was  as  little  conscientiousness  in  the 
matter  then  as  there  is  at  the  present  day,  when  those  who  are  en- 
titled to  receive  a  tenth  often  receive  even  less  than  a  twentieth. 
Moreover,  the  revenue  of  the  tribe,  which  the  Lord  had  chosen  as 
His  own  peculiar  possession,  was  not  intended  to  be  a  miserable  and 
beggarly  one  ;  but  it  was  hardly  equal,  at  any  time,  to  the  revenues 
which  the  priestly  castes  of  other  nations  derived  from  their  endow- 
ments. Again,  the  Levites  had  to  give  up  the  tenth  of  all  the  tithes 
they  received  to  the  priests ;  and  the  priests  were  to  offer  to  Jehovah 
upon  the  altar  a  portion  of  the  first-fruits,  heave-offerings,  and  wave- 
offerings  that  were  assigned  to  them.  Consequently,  as  the  whole 
nation  was  to  make  a  practical  acknowledgment,  in  the  presentation 
of  the  tithe  and  first-fruits,  that  it  had  received  its  hereditary  pro- 
perty as  a  fief  from  the  Lord  its  God,  so  the  Levites,  by  their  pay- 
ment of  the  tenth  to  the  priests,  and  the  priests,  by  presenting  a 
portion  of  their  revenues  upon  the  altar,  were  to  make  a  practical 
confession  that  they  had  received  all  their  revenues  from  the  Lord 
their  God,  and  owed  Him  praise  and  adoration  in  return  (see  Bdhr, 
Symholik,  ii.  pp.  43  sqq.). 

The  Law  concerning  Purification  from  the  Uncleanness  of  Death, — 

Chap.  xix. 

In  order  that  a  consciousness  of  the  continuance  of  the  covenant 


CHAP.  XIX.  2-10.  121 

relation  might  be  kept  alive  during  the  dying  out  of  the  race  that 
had  fallen  under  the  judgment  of  God,  after  the  severe  stroke  with 
which  the  Lord  had  visited  the  whole  nation  in  consequence  of  the 
rebellion  of  the  company  of  Korah,  He  gave  the  law  concerning 
purification  from  the  uncleanness  of  death,  in  which  first  of  all  the 
preparation  of  a  sprinkling  water  is  commanded  for  the  removal  of 
this  uncleanness  (vers.  1-lOa)  ;  and  then,  secondly,  the  use  of  this 
purifying  water  enjoined  as  an  eternal  statute  (vers.  105-22).  The 
thought  that  death,  and  the  putrefaction  of  death,  as  being  the 
embodiment  of  sin,  defiled  and  excluded  from  fellowship  with  the 
holy  God,  was  a  view  of  the  fall  and  its  consequences  which  had 
been  handed  down  from  the  primeval  age  (see  vol.  ii.  p.  357),  and 
which  w^as  not  only  shared  by  the  Israelites  with  many  of  the  nations 
of  antiquity,^  but  presupposed  by  the  laws  given  on  Sinai  as  a  truth 
well  known  in  Israel ;  and  at  the  same  time  confirmed,  both  in  the 
prohibition  of  the  priests  from  defiling  themselves  with  the  dead,  ex- 
cept in  the  case  of  their  nearest  blood-relations  (Lev.  xxi.  1-6,  10- 
12),  and  in  the  command,  that  every  one  who  was  defiled  by  a  corpse 
should  be  removed  out  of  the  camp  (chap.  v.  2-4).  Now,  so  long 
as  the  mortality  within  the  congregation  did  not  exceed  the  natural 
limits,  the  traditional  modes  of  purification  would  be  quite  sufficient. 
But  when  it  prevailed  to  a  hitherto  unheard-of  extent,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  sentence  pronounced  by  God,  the  defilements  would 
necessarily  be  so  crowded  together,  that  the  whole  congregation 
would  be  in  danger  of  being  infected  wdth  the  defilement  of  death, 
and  of  forfeiting  its  vocation  to  be  the  holy  nation  of  Jehovah, 
unless  God  provided  it  with  the  means  of  cleansing  itself  from  this 
uncleanness,  without  losing  the  fellowship  of  His  covenant  of  grace. 
The  law  which  follows  furnished  the  means.  In  ver.  2  this  law  is 
called  iry\F\T}  Dipn,  a  "  statute  of  instruction"  or  law-statute.  This 
combination  of  the  two  words  commonly  used  for  law  and  statute, 
which  is  only  met  with  again  in  chap.  xxxi.  21,  and  there,  as 
here,  in  connection  with  a  rule  relating  to  purification  from  the 
uncleanness  of  death,  is  probably  intended  to  give  emphasis  to  the 
design  of  the  law  about  to  be  given,  to  point  it  out  as  one  of  great 
importance,  but  not  as  decretum  absque  ulla  ratione,  sl  decree  with- 
out any  reason,  as  the  Rabbins  suppose. 

Vers.  2- 10a.  Preparation  of  the  Purifying  Water. — As  water  is 
the  ordinary  means  by  which  all  kinds  of  uncleanness  are  removed, 

^  Vid.  Bohr,  SymboUk,  ii.  pp.  466  sqq.  ;  Sommer^  hibl  Abhdll.  pp.  271  sqq. ; 
Knobel  on  this  chapter,  and  Leyrer  in  Herzorfs  Cyclopaedia. 


122  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

it  was  also  to  be  employed  iu  the  removal  of  the  uncleanness  of 
death.  But  as  this  uncleanness  was  the  strongest  of  all  religious 
defilements,  fresh  water  alone  was  not  sufficient  to  remove  it;  and 
consequently  a  certain  kind  of  sprinkling-water  was  appointed,  which 
was  strengthened  by  the  ashes  of  a  sin-offering,  and  thus  formed 
into  a  holy  alkali.  The  main  point  in  the  law  which  follows,  there- 
fore, was  the  preparation  of  the  ashes,  and  these  had  to  be  obtained 
by  the  sacrifice  of  a  red  heifer} — Vers.  2  sqq.  The  sons  of  Israel 
were  to  bring  to  Moses  a  red  heifer,  entirely  without  blemish,  and 
to  give  it  to  Eleazar  the  priest,  that  he  might  have  it  slaughtered  in 
his  presence  outside  the  camp,  nna  is  not  a  cow  generally,  but  a 
young  cow,  a  heifer,  Bd/jLaXt^  (LXX.),  juvenca,  between  the  calf 
and  the  full-grown  cow.  '""?'!?^,  of  a  red  colour,  is  not  to  be  con- 
nected with  n»'»»ri  in  the  sense  of  "  quite  red,"  as  the  Rabbins  in- 
terpret it ;  but  '"'C)''pnj  integra,  is  to  be  taken  by  itself,  and  the  words 
which  follow,  "  wherein  is  no  blemish,^*  to  be  regarded  as  defining 
it  still  more  precisely  (see  Lev.  xxii.  19,  20).  The  slaying  of  this 
heifer  is  called  nxi^n,  a  sin-offering,  in  vers.  9  and  17.  To  remind 
the  congregation  that  death  was  the  wages  of  sin,  the  antidote  to 
the  defilement  of  death  was  to  be  taken  from  a  sin-offering.  But 
as  the  object  was  not  to  remove  and  wipe  away  sin  as  such,  but 
simply  to  cleanse  the  congregation  from  the  uncleanness  which 
proceeded  from  death,  the  curse  of  sin,  it  was  necessary  that  the 
sin-offering  should  be  modified  in  a  peculiar  manner  to  accord  with 
this  special  design.  The  sacrificial  animal  was  not  to  be  a  bullock, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  ordinary  sin-offerings  of  the  congregation  (Lev. 
iv.  14),  but  a  female,  because  the  female  sex  is  the  bearer  of  life 
(Gen.  iii.  20),  a  nnSy  i.e,  lit  the  fruit-bringing;  and  of  a  red  colour, 
not  because  the  blood-red  colour  points  to  sin  (as  Hengstenherg  fol- 
lows the  Rabbins  and  earlier  theologians  in  supposing),  but  as  the 
colour  of  the  most  "  intensive  life,"  which  has  its  seat  in  the  blood, 
and  shows  itself  in  the  red  colour  of  the  face  (the  cheeks  and  lips)  ; 
and  one  "  upon  which  no  yoke  had  ever  come,"  i.e,  whose  vital 
energy  had  not  yet  been  crippled  by  labour  under  the  yoke.    Lastl}', 

^  On  this  sacrifice,  which  is  so  rich  in  symbolical  allusions,  but  the  details  of 
which  are  so  difficult  to  explain,  compare  the  rabbinical  statutes  in  the  talmudical 
tractate  Para  {Mishnah,  v.  SurenJi.  vi.  pp.  269  sqq.) ;  Maimonides  de  vacca  rufa  ; 
and  Lundius  jiid.  Heiligth.  pp.  680  sqq.  Among  modern  treatises  on  this  sub- 
ject, are  Bdhr's  SymhoUk,  ii.  pp.  493  sqq. ;  Hengstenherg,  Egypt  and  the  Books  of 
!Moses,  pp.  173  sqq. ;  Leyrer  in  Ilerzog^s  Cycl. ;  Kurtz  in  the  Tlieol.  Studien  und 
Kritiken,  1846,  pp.  629  sqq.  (also  Sacrijicial  Worship  of  the  Old  Testament, 
pp.  422  sqq.,  Eng.  transl.,  Tr.) ;  and  my  Archdologie,  i.  p.  58. 


I 


CHAP.  XIX.  2-10.  123 

like  all  the  sacrificial  animals,  it  was  to  be  uninjured,  and  free  from 
faults,  inasmuch  as  the  idea  of  representation,  which  lay  at  the  foun- 
dation of  all  the  sacrifices,  but  more  especially  of  the  sin-offerings, 
demanded  natural  sinlessness  and  original  purity,  quite  as  much  as 
imputed  sin  and  transferred  uncleanness.  Whilst  the  last-mentioned 
])rerequisite  showed  that  the  victim  was  well  fitted  for  bearing  sin, 
the  other  attributes  indicated  the  fulness  of  life  and  power  in  their 
highest  forms,  and  qualified  it  to  form  a  powerful  antidote  to  death. 
As  thus  appointed  to  furnish  a  reagent  against  death  and  mortal 
corruption,  the  sacrificial  animal  was  to  possess  throughout,  viz.  in 
colour,  in  sex,  and  in  the  character  of  its  body,  the  fulness  of  life  in 
its  greatest  freshness  and  vigour. — Ver.  3.  The  sacrifice  itself  was 
to  be  superintended  by  Eleazar  the  priest,  the  eldest  son  of  the  high 
priest,  and  his  presumptive  successor  in  office ;  because  Aaron,  or  the 
high  priest,  whose  duty  it  was  to  present  the  sin-offerings  for  the 
congi-egation  (Lev.  iv.  16),  could  not,  according  to  his  official  posi- 
tion, which  required  him  to  avoid  all  uncleanness  of  death  (Lev. 
xxi.  11,  12),  perform  such  an  act  as  this,  which  stood  in  the  closest 
relation  to  death  and  the  uncleanness  of  death,  and  for  that  very 
reason  had  to  be  performed  outside  the  camp.  The  subject,  to 
"  bring  her  fortli^  and  "  slay  lier^^  is  indefinite ;  since  it  was  not  the 
duty  of  the  priest  to  slay  the  sacrificial  animal,  but  of  the  offerer 
himself,  or  in  the  case  before  us,  of  the  congregation,  which  would 
appoint  one  of  its  own  number  for  the  purpose.  All  that  the  priest 
had  to  do  was  to  sprinkle  the  blood  ;  at  the  same  time  the  slaying 
was  to  take  place  VJD7,  before  him,  i.e,  before  his  eyes.  Eleazar  was 
to  sprinkle  some  of  the  blood  seven  times  "  towards  the  opposite," 
i,e.  towards  the  front  of  the  tabernacle  (seven  times,  as  in  Lev.  iv. 
17).  Through  this  sprinkling  of  the  blood  the  slaying  became  a 
sacrifice,  being  brought  thereby  into  relation  to  Jehovah  and  the 
sanctuary ;  whilst  the  life,  which  was  sacrificed  for  the  sin  of  the 
congregation,  was  given  up  to  the  Lord,  and  offered  up  in  the  only 
way  in  which  a  sacrifice,  prepared  like  this,  outside  the  sanctuary, 
could  possibly  be  offered. 

After  this  (vers.  5,  6),  they  were  to  burn  the  cow,  with  the  skin, 
flesh,  blood,  and  dung,  before  his  (Eleazar  s)  eyes,  and  he  was  to 
throw  cedar-wood,  hyssop,  and  scarlet  wool  into  the  fire.  The 
burning  of  the  sacrificial  animal  outside  the  camp  took  place  in 
the  case  of  every  sin-offering  for  the  whole  congregation,  for  the 
reasons  expounded  in  vol.  ii.  p.  307.  But  in  the  case  before  us,  the 
whole  of  the  sacrificial  act  had  to  be  performed  outside  the  camp, 


124  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

i.e.  outside  the  sphere  of  the  theocracy ;  because  the  design  of  this 
sin-offering  was  not  that  the  congregation  might  thereby  be  received 
through  the  expiation  of  its  sin  into  the  fellowship  of  the  God  and 
Lord  who  was  present  at  the  altar  and  in  the  sanctuary,  but  simply 
that  an  antidote  to  the  infection  of  death  might  be  provided  for  the 
congregation,  which  had  become  infected  through  fellowship  with 
death ;  and  consequently,  the  victim  was  to  represent,  not  the  living 
congregation  as  still  associated  with  the  God  who  was  present  in  His 
earthly  kingdom,  biit  those  members  of  the  congregation  who  had 
fallen  victims  to  temporal  death  as  the  wages  of  sin,  and,  as  such, 
were  separated  from  the  earthly  theocracy  (see  my  Archceology,  i. 
p.  283).  In  this  sacrifice,  the  blood,  which  was  generally  poured 
out  at  the  foot  of  the  altar,  was  burned  along  with  the  rest,  and  the 
ashes  to  be  obtained  were  impregnated  with  the  substance  thereof. 
But  in  order  still  further  to  increase  the  strength  of  these  ashes, 
which  were  already  well  fitted  to  serve  as  a  powerful  antidote  to 
the  corruption  of  death,  as  being  the  incorruptible  residuum  of  the 
sin-offering  which  had  not  been  destroyed  by  the  fire,  cedar-wood 
was  thrown  into  the  fire,  as  the  symbol  of  the  incorruptible  continu- 
ance of  life ;  and  hyssop,  as  the  symbol  of  purification  from  the  cor- 
ruption of  death ;  and  scarlet  wool,  the  deep  red  of  which  shadowed 
forth  the  strongest  vital  energy  (see  at  Lev.  xiv.  6), — so  tliat  the 
ashes  might  be  regarded  "  as  the  quintessence  of  all  that  purified 
and  strengthened  life,  refined  and  sublimated  by  the  fire  "  (Leyrer)» 
— ^Yers.  7-lOa,  etc.  The  persons  who  took  part  in  this — viz.  the 
priest,  the  man  who  attended  to  the  burning,  and  the  clean  man 
who  gathered  the  ashes  together,  and  deposited  them  in  a  clean 
place  for  subsequent  use — became  unclean  till  the  evening  in  con- 
sequence ;  not  from  the  fact  that  they  had  officiated  for  unclean 
persons,  and,  in  a  certain  sense,  had  participated  in  their  unclean- 
ness  {Knohel),  but  through  the  uncleanness  of  sin  and  death,  which 
had  passed  over  to  the  sin-offering ;  just  as  the  man  who  led  into 
the  wilderness  the  goat  which  had  been  rendered  unclean  through 
the  imposition  of  sin,  became  himself  unclean  in  consequence  (Lev. 
xvi.  26).  Even  the  sprinkling  water  prepared  from  the  ashes 
defiled  every  one  who  touched  it  (ver.  21).  But  when  the  ashes 
were  regarded  in  relation  to  their  appointment  as  the  means  of 
purification,  they  were  to  be  treated  as  clean.  Not  only  were  they 
to  be  collected  together  by  a  clean  man  ;  but  they  were  to  be  kept 
for  use  in  a  clean  place,  just  as  the  ashes  of  the  sacrifices  that  were 
taken  away  from  tlie  altar  were  to  be  carried  to  a  clean  place  out- 


CHAP.  XIX.  10-22.  125 

side  the  camp  (Lev.  vi.  4).  These  defilements,  like  every  other 
which  only  lasted  till  the  evening,  were  to  be  removed  by  washing 
(see  vol.  ii.  pp.  373—4).  The  ashes  thus  collected  were  to  serve 
the  congregation  rrnj  '•07^  i.e,  literally  as  water  of  uncleanness ;  in 
other  words,  as  water  by  which  uncleanness  was  to  be  removed. 
"  Water  of  uncleanness  "•  is  analogous  to  "  water  of  sin  "  in  chap, 
viii.  7. 

Vers.  10^-22.  Use  of  the  Water  of  Pmijication. — The  words  in 
ver.  106,  "  And  it  shall  he  to  the  children  of  Israel,  and  to  the 
stranger  in  the  midst  of  them,  for  an  everlasting  statute,^  relate  to  the 
preparation  and  application  of  the  sprinkling  water,  and  connect 
the  foregoing  instructions  with  those  which  follow. — Vers.  11-13 
contain  the  general  rules  for  the  use  of  the  water ;  vers.  14-22  a 
more  detailed  description  of  the  execution  of  those  rules. — Vers.  11 
sqq.  Whoever  touched  a  corpse,  ''with  regard  to  all  the  souls  of 
men^''  i.e,  the  corpse  of  a  person,  of  whatever  age  or  sex,  was  un- 
clean for  seven  days,  and  on  the  third  and  seventh  day  he  was  to 
cleanse  himself  (Ntsnnn^  as  in  chap.  viii.  21)  with  the  water  (ia  re- 
fers, so  far  as  the  sense  is  concerned,  to  the  water  of  purification). 
If  he  neglected  this  cleansing,  he  did  not  become  clean,  and  he 
defiled  the  dwelling  of  Jehovah  (see  at  Lev.  xv.  31).  Such  a 
man  was  to  be  cut  off  from  Israel  (vid,  at  Gen.  xvii.  14). — Vers. 
14-16.  Special  instructions  concerning  the  defilement.  If  a  man 
died  in  a  tent,  every  one  who  entered  it,  or  who  was  there  at  the 
time,  became  unclean  for  seven  days.  So  also  did  every  "open 
vessel  upon  which  there  was  not  a  covering,  a  string"  i.e.  that  had 
not  a  covering  fastened  by  a  string,  to  prevent  the  smell  of  the 
corpse  from  penetrating  it.  7'*nB,  a  string,  is  in  apposition  to  T'^^, 
a  band,  or  binding  (see  Ges.  §  113  ;  Ewald,  §  287,  e.).  This  also 
applied  to  any  one  in  the  open  field,  who  "touched  a  man  who  had 
either  been  slain  by  the  sword  or  had  died  a  natural  death,  or  even 
a  bone  (skeleton),  or  a  grave. — Vers.  17-19.  Ceremony  of  purifica- 
tion. They  were  to  take  for  the  unclean  person  some  of  the  dust 
of  the  burning  of  the  cow,  i.e.  some  of  the  ashes  obtained  by  burn- 
ing the  cow,  and  put  living,  i.e.  fresh  water  (see  Lev.  xiv.  5),  upon 
it  in  a  vessel.  A  clean  man  was  then  to  take  a  bunch  of  hyssop 
(see  Ex.  xii.  22),  on  account  of  its  inherent  purifying  power,  and 
dip  it  in  the  water,  on  the  third  and  seventh  day  after  the  defile- 
ment had  taken  place,  and  to  sprinkle  the  tent,  with  the  vessels  and 
persons  in  it,  as  well  as  every  one  who  had  touched  a  corpse,  whether 
a  person  slain,  or  one  who  had  died  a  natural  death,  or  a  grave  ;  after 


126  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


which  the  persons  were  to  wash  their  clothes  and  bathe,  that  they 
might  be  clean  in  the  evening.  As  the  uncleanness  in  question  is 
held  up  as  the  highest  grade  of  uncleanness,  by  its  duration  being 
fixed  at  seven  days,  i,e.  an  entire  week,  so  the  appointment  of  a 
double  purification  with  the  sprinkling  water  shows  the  force  of 
the  uncleanness  to  be  removed ;  whilst  the  selection  of  the  third 
and  seventh  days  was  simply  determined  by  the  significance  of  the  ■■ 
numbers  themselves.  In  ver.  20,  the  threat  of  punishment  for  the 
neglect  of  purification  is  repeated  from  ver.  13,  for  the  purpose  of 
making  it  most  emphatic. — Vers.  21,  22.  This  also  was  to  be  an  mt 
everlasting  statute,  that  he  who  sprinkled  the  water  of  purification, 
or  even  touched  it  (see  at  vers.  7  sqq.),  and  he  who  was  touched 
by  a  persoil  defiled  (by  a  corpse),  and  also  the  person  who  touched 
him,  should  be  unclean  till  the  evening, — a  rule  which  also  applied 
to  other  forms  of  uncleanness. 


ISRAEL  S  LAST  JOURNEY  FROM  KADESH  TO  THE  HEIGHTS  OF 
PISGAH  IN  THE  FIELDS  OF  MOAB. — CHAP.  XX.  AND  XXI. 

In  the  first  month  of  the  fortieth  year,  the  whole  congregation 
of  Israel  assembled  again  at  Kadesh,  in  the  desert  of  Zin,  to  com- 
mence the  march  to  Canaan.  In  Kadesh,  Miriam  died  (chap.  xx. 
1),  and  the  people  murmured  against  Moses  and  Aaron  on  account 
of  the  want  of  water.  The  Lord  relieved  this  want,  by  pouring 
water  from  the  rock ;  but  Moses  sinned  on  this  occasion,  so  that  he 
was  not  allowed  to  enter  Canaan  (vers.  2-13).  From  Kadesh, 
Moses  sent  messengers  to  the  king  of  Edom,  to  ask  permission  for 
the  Israelites  to  pass  peaceably  through  his  land ;  but  this  was 
refused  by  the  king  of  Edom  (vers.  14-21).  In  the  meantime,  the 
Israelites  marched  from  Kadesh  to  Mount  Hor,  on  the  borders  of 
the  land  of  Edom ;  and  there  Aaron  died,  and  Eleazar  was  in- 
vested with  the  high-priesthood  in  his  stead  (vers.  22-29).  On 
this  march  they  were  attacked  by  the  Canaanitish  king  of  Arad ; 
but  they  gained  a  complete  victory,  and  laid  his  cities  under  the 
ban  (chap.  xix.  1-3).  As  the  king  of  Edom  opposed  their  passing 
through  his  land,  they  were  compelled  to  go  from  Mount  Hor  to 
the  Eed  Sea,  and  round  the  land  of  Edom.  On  the  way  the  mur- 
muring people  were  bitten  by  poisonous  serpents ;  but  the  penitent 
among  them  were  healed  of  the  bite  of  the  serpent,  by  looking  at 
the  brazen  serpent  which  Moses  set  up  at  the  command  of  God 
(vers.  4-9).     After  going  round  the  Moabitish  mountains,  they 


CHAP.  XX.-XXI.  3.  127 

turned  to  the  north,  and  went  along  the  eastern  side  of  the  Edoni- 
itish  and  Moabitisii  territory,  as  far  as  the  Arnon,  on  the  border 
of  the  Amoritish  kingdom  of  Sihon,  with  the  intention  of  going 
through  to  the  Jordan,  and  so  entering  Canaan  (vers.  10-20). 
But  as  Sihon  would  not  allow  the  Israelites  to  pass  through  his 
land,  and  made  a  hostile  demonstration  against  them,  they  smote 
him  and  conquered  his  land,  and  also  the  northern  Amoritish  king- 
dom of  Og,  king  of  Bashan  (vers.  21-35),  and  forced  their  way 
through  tlie  Amoritish  territory  to  the  heights  of  Pisgah,  for  the 
purpose  of  going  forward  thence  into  the  steppes  of  Moab  by  the 
Jordan  (chap.  xxii.  1).  These  marches  formed  the  third  stage  in 
the  guidance  of  Israel  through  the  desert  to  Canaan. 

Death  of  Miriam,  Water  out  of  the  Rock.  Refusal  of  a  Passage 
through  Edom,  Aaron^s  Death,  Conquest  over  the  King  of 
Arad, — Chap,  xx.— xxi.  3. 

The  events  mentioned  in  the  heading,  which  took  place  either 
in  Kadesh  or  on  the  march  thence  to  the  mountain  of  Hor,  are 
grouped  together  in  chap.  xx.  1-xxi.  3,  rather  in  a  classified  order 
than  in  one  that  is  strictly  chronological.  The  death  of  Miriam 
took  place  during  the  time  when  the  people  were  collected  at  Kadesh- 
Barnea  in  the  desert  of  Zin  (ver.  21).  But  when  the  whole  nation 
assembled  together  in  this  desert  there  was  a  deficiency  of  water, 
which  caused  the  people  to  murmur  against  Moses,  until  God  re- 
lieved the  want  by  a  miracle  (vers.  2-13).  It  was  from  Kadesh 
that  messengers  were  sent  to  the  king  of  Edom  (vers.  14  sqq.)  ; 
but  instead  of  waiting  at  Kadesh  till  the  messengers  returned, 
Moses  appears  to  have  proceeded  with  the  people  in  the  meantime 
into  the  Arabah.  When  and  where  the  messengers  returned  to 
Moses,  we  are  not  informed.  So  much  is  certain,  however,  that  the 
Edomites  did  not  come  with  an  army  against  the  Israelites  (vers. 
20,  21),  until  they  approached  their  land  with  the  intention  of 
passing  through.  For  it  was  in  the  Arabah,  at  Mount  Hor,  that 
Israel  first  turned  to  go  round  the  land  of  Edom  (chap.  xxi.  4). 
The  attack  of  the  Canaanites  of  Arad  (chap.  xxi.  1-3),  who  at- 
tempted to  prevent  the  Israelites  from  advancing  into  the  desert  of 
Zin,  occurred  in  the  interval  between  the  departure  from  Kadesh 
and  the  arrival  in  the  Arabah  at  Mount  Hor ;  so  that  if  a  chrono- 
logical arrangement  were  adopted,  this  event  would  be  placed  in 
chap.  XX.  22,  between  the  first  and  second  clauses  of  this  verse. 
The  words  "  and  came  to  Mo2int  Ilor^'  (ver.  22^)  are  anticipatory, 


128  THE  i'OUKTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

and  introduce  the  most  important  event  of  all  that  period,  viz.  the 
death  of  Aaron  at  Mount  Hor  (vers.  23-29).^ 


I 


Yer.  1.  Assembling  of  the  Congregation  at  Kadesh. — 
In  the  first  month  the  children  of  Israel  came  into  the  desert  of 
Ziuj  i.e.  in  the  fortieth  year  of  their  wanderings,  at  the  commence- 
ment of  which  "  the  whole  congregation"  assembled  together  once  ■■ 
more  in  the  very  same  place  where  the  sentence  had  been  passed 
thirty-seven  years  and  a  half  before,  that  they  should  remain  in  the 
desert  for  forty  years,  until  the  rebellious  generation  had  died  out. 
•The  year  is  not  mentioned  in  ver.  1,  but,  according  to  chap.  xiv. 
32  sqq.,  it  can  only  be  the  year  with  which  the  forty  years  of  the 
sentence  that  they  should  die  out  in  the  wilderness  came  to  an  end, 
that  is  to  say,  the  fortieth  year  of  their  wandering.     This  is  put 

^  Even  Fries  (pp.  53,  54)  has  admitted  that  the  account  in  Num.  xxi.  1,  Ml 
xxxiii.  40,  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  rehearsal  of  an  event  which  took  place  before  H I 
the  arrival  of  the  Israelites  at  Mount  Hor,  and  that  the  conflict  with  the  king 
of  Arad  must  have  occurred  immediately  upon  the  advance  of  Israel  into  the 
desert  of  Zin  ;  and  he  correctly  observes,  that  the  sacred  writer  has  arranged 
what  stood  in  practical  connection  with  the  sin  of  Moses  and  Aaron,  and  the 
refusal  of  Edom,  in  the  closest  juxtaposition  to  those  events  :  whereas,  after  he 
had  once  commenced  his  account  of  the  tragical  occurrences  in  chap,  xx.,  there 
was  no  place  throughout  the  whole  of  that  chapter  for  mentioning  the  conflict 
with  Arad  ;  and  consequently  this  battle  could  only  find  a  place  in  the  second 
line,  after  the  record  of  the  most  memorable  events  which  occurred  between 
the  death  of  Miriam  and  that  of  Aaron,  and  to  which  it  was  subordinate  in 
actual  significance.  On  the  other  hand,  Fries  objects  to  the  arrangement  we 
have  adopted  above,  and  supposes  that  Israel  did  not  go  straight  from  Kadesh 
through  the  Wady  Murreh  into  the  Arabah,  and  to  the  border  of  the  (actual) 
land  of  Edom,  and  then  turn  back  to  the  Red  Sea  ;  but  that  after  the  failure  of 
the  negotiations  with  the  king  of  Edom,  Moses  turned  at  once  from  the  desert 
of  Zin  and  plain  of  Kadesh,  and  went  back  in  a  south-westerly  direction  to  the 
Hebron  road  ;  and  having  followed  this  road  to  Jebel  Araif,  the  south-western 
corner-pillar  of  the  western  Edom,  turned  at  right  angles  and  went  by  the  side 
of  Jebel  Mukrah  to  the  Arabah,  where  he  was  compelled  to  alter  his  course 
again  through  meeting  with  Mount  Hor,  the  border-pillar  of  Edom  at  that 
point,  and  to  go  southwards  to  the  Red  Sea  (pp.  88-9).  But  although  this 
combination  steers  clear  of  the  difl&culty  connected  with  our  assumption, — viz. 
that  when  Israel  advanced  into  the  Arabah  to  encamp  at  Mount  Hor,  they  had 
actually  trodden  upon  the  Edomitish  territory  in  that  part  of  the  Arabah  which 
connected  the  mountain  land  of  Azazimeh,  of  which  the  Edomites  had  taken 
forcible  possession,  with  their  hereditary  country,  the  mountains  of  Seir, — we 
cannot  regard  this  view  as  in  harmony  with  the  biblical  account.  For,  apart  from 
the  improbability  of  Moses  going  a  second  time  to  Mount  Hor  on  the  border  of 
Edom,  after  he  had  been  compelled  to  desist  from  his  advance  through  the 
desert  of  Zin  (Wady  MurreJi),  and  take  a  circuitous  route,  or  rather  make  a 


CHAP.  XX.  2-13.  129 

beyond  all  doubt  by  what  follows.  For  the  whole  congregation 
proceeds  from  Kadesh  in  the  desert  of .  Zin  to  Mount  Hor,  where 
Aaron  died,  and  that,  according  to  chap,  xxxiii.  38,  in  the  fifth 
month  of  the  fortieth  year  after  the  exodus  from  Egypt.  Miriam 
died  during  the  time  that  the  people  were  staying  (2*^."!)  in  Kadesh, 
and  there  she  was  buried. 

Vers.  2-13.  Sin  of  Moses  and  Aaron  at  the  Water  of 
Strife  at  Kadesh. — In  the  arid  desert  the  congregation  was  in 
want  of  water,  and  the  people  quarrelled  with  Moses  in  consequence. 
In  connection  with  the  first  stay  in  Kadesh  there  is  nothing  said 
about  any  deficiency  of  water.  But  as  the  name  Kadesh  embraces 
a  large  district  of  the  desert  of  Zin,  and  is  not  confined  to  one  par- 
ticular spot,  there  might  easily  be  a  want  of  water  in  this  place  or 

retrograde  movement,  on  the  western  side  of  the  Edomitish  territory  of  the 
land  of  Azazimeh,  only  to  be  driven  back  a  second  time,  the  account  of  the 
contest  with  the  king  of  Arad  is  hard  to  reconcile  with  this  combination.  In 
that  case  the  king  of  Arad  must  have  attacked  or  overtaken  the  Israelites  when 
they  were  collected  together  in  the  desert  of  Zin  at  Kadesh.  But  this  does  not 
tally  with  the  words  of  chap.  xxi.  1,  "  When  the  Canaanite  heard  that  Israel 
came  (was  approaching)  by  the  way  of  the  spies  ; "  for  if  Moses  turned  round 
in  Kadesh  to  go  down  the  Hebron  road  as  far  as  Jebel  Araif ,  in  consequence  of 
the  refusal  of  Edom,  the  Israelites  did  not  take  the  way  of  the  spies  at  all,  for 
their  way  went  northwards  from  Kadesh  to  Canaan.  The  supposition  of  Fries 
(p.  54),  that  the  words  in  chap.  xxi.  1,  "  came  by  the  way  of  the  spies,"  are  a 
permutation  of  those  in  chap.  xx.  1,  "  came  into  the  desert  of  Zin,"  and  that 
the  two  perfectly  coincide  as  to  time,  is  forced ;  as  the  Israelites  are  described 
in  chap.  xx.  1  not  only  as  coming  into  the  desert  of  Zin  in  general,  but  as 
assembling  together  there  at  Kadesh. 

Modern  critics  {Knohel  and  others)  have  also  mutilated  these  chapters,  and 
left  only  chap.  xx.  1  (in  part),  2,  6,  22-29,  xxi.  10,  11,  xxii.  1,  as  parts  of  the 
original  work,  whilst  all  the  rest  is  described  as  a  Jehovistic  addition,  partly 
from  ancient  sources  and  partly  from  the  invention  of  the  Jehovist  himself. 
But  the  supposed  contradiction — viz.  that  whilst  the  original  work  describes  the 
Israelites  as  going  througli  northern  Edom,  and  going  round  the  Moabitish 
territory  in  the  more  restricted  sense,  the  Jehovist  represents  them  as  going 
round  the  land  of  Edom  upon  the  west,  south,  and  east  (chap.  xx.  21,  xxi.  4), 
and  also  as  going  round  the  land  of  the  Arnon  in  a  still  larger  circle,  and  past 
other  places  as  well  (chap.  xxi.  12,  16,  18) — rests  upon  a  false  interpretation  of 
the  passages  in  question.  The  other  arguments  adduced — viz.  the  fact  that  the 
Jehovist  gives  great  prominence  to  the  hatred  of  the  Edomites  (chap.  xx.  18, 
20)  and  interweaves  poetical  sentences  (chap.  xxi.  14,  15,  17,  18,  27,  28),  the 
miraculous  rod  in  Moses'  hand  (chap.  xx.  8),  and  the  etymology  (chap.  xxi.  3) 
— are  all  just  arguing  in  a  circle,  since  the  supposition  that  all  these  things  are 
foreign  to  the  original  work,  is  not  a  fact  demonstrated,  but  a  simple  petiiio 
principil, 

PENTu — VOL.  III.  I 


130  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  other.  In  their  faithless  discontent,  the  people  wished  that  they 
had  died  when  their  brethren  died  before  Jehovah.  The  allusion 
is  not  to  Korah's  company,  as  Knohel  supposes,  and  the  word  i^a, 
"  to  expire,"  would  be  altogether  inapplicable  to  their  destruction ; 
but  the  reference  is  to  those  who  had  died  one  by  one  during  the 
thirty-seven  years.  "  TFAy,"  they  murmured  once  more  against 
Moses  and  Aaron,  "  have  ye  brought  the  congregation  of  God  into 
this  deserty  to  perish  there  ivith  their  cattle  ?  Why  have  ye  brought 
it  out  of  Egypt  into  this  evil  land,  where  there  is  no  seed,  no  fig-trees 
and  pomegranates y  no  vines,  and  no  water  to  drink  V — Ver.  6.  Moses 
and  Aaron  then  turned  to  the  tabernacle,  to  ask  for  the  help  of 
the  Lord;  and  the  glory  of  the  Lord  immediately  appeared  (see  at 
chap.  xvii.  7  and  xiv.  10). — ^Vers.  7,  8.  The  Lord  relieved  the  want 
of  water.  Moses  was  to  take  the  staff,  and  with  Aaron  to  gather 
together  the  congregation,  and  speak  to  the  rock  before  their  eyes, 
when  it  would  give  forth  water  for  the  congregation  and  their  cattle 
to  drink. — Vers.  9-11.  Moses  then  took  the  rod  "  from  before 
Jehovah," — i.e.  the  rod  with  which  he  had  performed  miracles  in 
Egypt  (Ex.  xvii.  5),  and  which  was  laid  up  in  the  sanctuary,  not 
Aaron's  rod  which  blossomed  (chap.  xvii.  25), — and  collected  the 
congregation  together  before  the  rock,  and  said  to  them,  "  Hear,  ye 
rebels,  shall  loe  fetch  you  water  out  of  this  rock  f"  He  then  smote 
the  rock  twice  with  his  rod,  whereupon  much  water  came  out,  so 
that  the  congregation  and  their  cattle  had  water  to  drink. — Yer. 
12.  The  Lord  then  said  to  both  of  them,  both  Moses  and  Aaron, 
"  Because  ye  have  not  trusted  firmly  in  Me,  to  sanctify  Me  before  the 
eyes  of  the  children  of  Israel,  therefore  ye  shall  not  bring  this  congre- 
gation into  the  land  which  I  have  given  themr  The  want  of  behef 
or  firm  confidence  in  the  Lord,  through  which  both  of  them  had 
sinned,  was  not  actual  unbelief  or  distrust  in  the  omnipotence  and 

^^ gr§?®...Pl.i?rfii-5£j^L-^^^  could  not  rdlieve  t&  want  of  water  or 

,?xtend  His   help  to  the  murmuring  people  ;    for  the  Lord  had " 

promised.  His  help  to  Moses,  and  Moses  did  what  the  Lord  had 
commanded  him.  It  was  simply  the  want  of  full  believing  confi- 
dence, a  momentary  waverinfy  of  that  immovable  assurance^  which  * 
two^neadsonEenation  ougEt  to  have  shown  to  the  congre^^ 
gation,  tut  did  not  show.  Moses  did  even  more  than  God  had 
['commanded  him.  Instead  of  speaking  to  the  rock  with  the  rod  of 
God  in  his  hand,  as  God  directed  him,  he  spoke  to  the  congregation, 
and  in  these  inconsiderate  words,  "  Shall  we  fetch  you  water  out  of 
the  rock?"  words  which,  if  they  did  not  express  any  doubt  in  the 


V 


CHAP.  XX.  2-13.  131 

help  of  the  Lord,  were  certainly  fitted  to  strengthen  the  people  in 
their  unbelief,  and  are  therefore  described  in  Ps,  cvi.  33  as  prating 
(speaking  unadvisedly)  with  the  lips  (cf.  Lev.  v.  4).  He  then 
struck  the  rock  twice  with  the  rod,  "  as  if  it  depended  upon  human 
exertion,  and  not  upon  the  power  of  God  alone,"  or  as  if  the  promise 
of  God  "  would  not  have  been  fulfilled  without  all  the  smiting  on 
his  part"  {Knohel),  In  the  ill-will  expressed  in  these  words  the 
^^weakness  of  faith  was  manifested,  h^  which  the  f^thfulsejyaryLo' 
God,  worn  out  with  the  numerous  temptations,  allowed  nimself  to 
Te  overcome,  so  tliaf  ne  'smmblea,  ana  oiK'  not  sanctify  the  Lord 
^"^nSefore  the  eyes  of  the  people,  as  he  ought  to  Have  done.  AarorT" 
also  wavered  along  with  Moses,  inasmuch  as  he  did  nothing  to 
prevent  Moses'  fall.  But  their  sin  became  a  grievous  one,  from  the ' 
fact  that  Jthey  acted  unworthily  of  their  office.  God  punished  them, 
therefore,  by  withdrawing  their  office  from  them  before  they  had 
finished  the  work  entrusted  to  them.  They  were  not  to  conduct 
the  congregation  into  the  promised  land,  and  therefore  were  not  to 
enter  in  themselves  (cf.  chap,  xxvii.  12-14 ;  Deut.  xxxii.  48  sqq.). 
The  rock,  from  which  water  issued,  is  distinguished  by  the  article 
^r?"!}?  not  as  being  already  known,  or  mentioned  before,  but  simply 
as  a  particular  rock  in  that  neighbourhood  ;  though  the  situation  is 
not  described,  so  as  to  render  it  possible  to  search  for  it  now.^ — 
Ver.  13.  The  account  closes  with  the  words,  "  This  is  the  water  of 
strife,  about  which  the  children  of  Israel  strove  with  Jehovah,  and  He 
sanctified  Himself  on  them"     This  does  not  imply  that  the  scene  of 

^  Moses  Nachmanides  has  given  a  correct  interpretation  of  the  words,  "  Speak 
to  the  rock  before  their  eyes  "  (ver.  8)  :  viz.  "  to  the  first  rock  in  front  of  them, 
and  standing  in  their  sight."  The  fable  attributed  to  the  Eabbins,  viz.  that  the 
rock  of  Rephidim  followed  the  Israelites  all  about  in  the  desert,  and  suppUed 
them  with  water,  cannot  be  proved  from  the  talmudical  and  rabbinical  passages 
given  by  Buxtorf  Qiistoria  Petrse  in  deserto)  in  his  exercitatt.  c.  r.,  but  is  simply 
founded  upon  a  literal  interpretation  of  certain  rabbinical  statements  concerning 
the  identity  of  the  well  at  Rephidim  with  that  at  E^adesh,  which  were  evidently 
intended  to  be  figurative,  as  Aharbanel  expressly  afl&rms  (Buxtorf^  I.  c.  pp.  422 
seq.).  "  Their  true  meaning,"  he  says,  "was,  that  those  waters  which  flowed 
out  in  Horeb  were  the  gift  of  God  granted  to  the  Israelites,  and  continued  all 
through  the  desert,  just  like  the  manna.  For  wherever  they  went,  fountains  of 
living  waters  were  opened  to  them  as  the  occasion  required.  And  for  this 
reason,  the  rock  in  Kadesh  was  the  same  rock  as  that  in  Horeb.  Still  less 
ground  is  there  for  supposing  that  the  Apostle  Paul  alluded  to  any  such  rabbi- 
nical fable  when  he  said,  "  They  drank  of  that  spiritual  rock  that  followed  them" 
(1  Cor.  X.  4),  and  gave  it  a  spiritual  interpretation  in  the  words,  "  and  that 
rock  was  Christ." 


132  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

this  occurrence  received  the  name  of  "strife-water,"  but  simply 
that  the  water  which  God  brought  out  of  the  rock  for  the  Israelites 
received  that  name.  But  God_sanctified  Himself  on  them,  by  the 
fact  that,  on  the  one  hand,  He  put  Itheir  ujib3Jef  to  shaine  by  the 
miraculous  gift  of  water,  and  on  the  other  hand  jounislied  Moses^ 
and  Aaron  for  the  weakness  of  their  faith.^ 

Vers.  14-21.  Message  of  the  Israelites  to  the  King  of 
Edom. — As  Israel  was  about  to  start  from  Kadesh  upon  its  march 
to  Canaan,  but  wished  to  enter  it  from  the  east  across  the  Jordan, 
and  not  from  the  south,  where  the  steep  and  lofty  mountain  ranges 
presented  obstacles  which  would  have  been  difficult  to  overcome,  if 
not  quite  insuperable,  Moses  sent  messengers  from  Kadesh  to  the 
king  of  Edom,  to  solicit  from  the  kindred  nation  a  friendly  and 
unimpeded  passage  through  their  land.  He  reminded  the  king  of 
the  relationship  of  Israel,  of  their  being  brought  down  to  Egypt,  of 
the  oppression  they  had  endured  there,  and  their  deliverance  out  of 
the  land,  and  promised  him  that  they  would  not  pass  through  fields 
and  vineyards,  nor  drink  the  w^ater  of  their  wells,  but  keep  to  the 
king's  way,  without  turning  to  the  right  hand  or  the  left,  and  thus 
w^ould  do  no  injury  whatever  to  the  land  (vers.  14-16).^  By  the 
"  angel "  who  led  Israel  out  of  Egypt  we  are  naturally  to  under- 
stand not  the  pillar  of  cloud  and  fire  (Knobel),  but  the  angel  of  the 
Lord,  the  visible  revealer  of  the  invisible  God,  whom  the  messengers 

^  The  assumption  of  neological  critics,  that  this  occurrence  is  identical  with 
the  similar  one  at  Rephidim  (Ex.  xvii.),  and  that  this  is  only  another  saga 
based  upon  the  same  event,  has  no  firm  ground  whatever.  The  want  of  water 
in  the  arid  desert  is  a  fact  so  constantly  attested  by  travellers,  that  it  would  be 
a  matter  of  great  surprise  if  Israel  had  only  experienced  this  want,  and  quarrelled 
with  its  God  and  its  leaders,  once  in  the  course  of  forty  years.  As  early  as  Ex. 
XV.  22  sqq.  the  people  murmured  because  of  the  want  of  drinkable  water,  and 
the  bitter  water  was  turned  into  sweet ;  and  immediately  after  the  event  before 
us,  it  gave  utterance  to  the  complaint  again,  "  We  have  no  bread  and  no  water" 
(chap.  xxi.  4,  5).  But  if  the  want  remained  the  same,  the  relief  of  that  want 
would  necessarily  be  repeated  in  the  same  or  a  similar  manner.  ^Moreover,  the 
occurrences  at  Rephidim  (or  Massah-Meribah)  and  at  Kadesh  are  altogether 
different  from  each  other.  In  Rephidim,  God  gave  the  people  water  out  of  the 
rock,  and  the  murmuring  of  the  people  was  stayed.  In  Kadesh,  God  no  doubt 
relieved  the  distress  in  the  same  way  ;  but  the  mediators  of  His  mercy,  Moses 
and  Aaron,  sinned  at  the  time,  so  that  God  sanctified  Himself  upon  them  by  a 
judgment,  because  they  had  not  sanctified  Him  before  the  congregation.  (See 
Hengstenberg,  Dissertations,  vol.  ii.) 

^  We  learn  from  Judg.  xi.  17,  that  Israel  sent  messengers  from  Kadesh  to 
the  king  of  Moab  also,  and  with  a  similar  commission,  and  that  he  also  refused 


CHAP.  XX.  14-21.  133 

describe  indefinitely  as  "  an  angel,"  when  addressing  the  EdomiteS. 
Kadesh  is  represented  in  ver.  16  as  ti  city  on  the  border  of  the 
Edomitish  territory.  The  reference  is  to  Kadesh-Barnea  (chap, 
xxxii.  8,  xxxiv.  4 ;  Deut.  i.  2, 19,  ii.  14,  ix.  23  ;  Josh.  x.  41,  xiv.  6, 
7,  XV.  3).  This  city  was  no  doubt  situated  quite  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Ain  Kudes,  the  well  of  Kadesh,  discovered  by  Rowland. 
This  well  was  called  En-Mishpat,  the  fountain  of  judgment,  in 
Abraham's  time  (Gen.  xiv.  7)  ;  and  the  name  Kadesh  occurs  first  of 
all  on  the  first  arrival  of  the  Israelites  in  that  region,  in  the  account 
of  the  events  which  took  place  there,  as  being  the  central  point  of 
the  place  of  encampment,  the  "  desert  of  Paran,"  or  "  desert  of 
Zin"  (cf.  chap.  xiii.  26  with  ver.  21,  and  chap.  xii.  16).  And  even 
on  the  second  arrival  of  the  congregation  in  that  locality,  it  is  not 
mentioned  till  after  the  desert  of  Zin  (chap.  xx.  1)  ;  whilst  the 
full  name  Kadesh-Bamea  is  used  by  Moses  for  the  first  time  in 
chap,  xxxii,  8,  when  reminding  the  people  of  those  mournful  occur- 
rences in  Kadesh  in  chap.  xiii.  and  xiv.  The  conjecture  is  therefore 
a  very  natural  one,  that  the  place  in  question  received  the  name 
of  Kadesh  first  of  all  from  that  tragical  occurrence  (chap,  xiv.),  or 
possibly  from  the  murmuring  of  the  congregation  on  account  of 
the  want  of  water,  which  led  Moses  and  Aaron  to  sin,  so  that  the 
Lord  sanctified  (^i?l)  Himself  upon  them  by  a  judgment,  because 
they  had  not  sanctified  Him  before  the  children  of  Israel  (vers.  12 
and  13)  ;  that  Baimea  was  the  older  or  original  name  of  the  town, 
which  was  situated  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  "  water  of  strife," 
and  that  this  name  was  afterwards  united  with  Kadesh,  and  formed 
into  a  composite  noun.  If  this  conjecture  is  a  correct  one,  the 
name  Kadesh  is  used  proleptically,  not  only  in  Gen.  xiv.  7,  as  a 
more  precise  definition  of  En-Mishpat,  but  also  in  Gen.  xvi.  14,  xx. 
1 ;  and  Num.  xiii.  26,  and  xx.  1 ;  and  there  is  no  lack  of  analogies 
for  this.  It  is  in  this  too  that  we  are  probably  to  seek  for  an 
explanation  of  the  fact,  that  in  the  list  of  stations  in  chap,  xxxiii. 
the  name  Kadesh  does  not  occur  in  connection  with  the  first  arrival 
of  the  congregation  in  the  desert  of  Zin,  but  only  in  connection 
with  their  second  arrival  (ver.  36),  and  that  the  place  of  encamp- 
ment on  their  first  arrival  is  called  Rithmah,  and  not  Barnea,  because 


to  grant  the  request  for  an  unimpeded  passage  through  his  land.  This 
is  passed  over  in  silence  here,  because  the  refusal  of  the  Moabites  had  no  influence 
upon  the  further  progress  of  the  Israelites.  "  For  if  they  could  not  pass  through 
Edom,  the  permission  of  the  Moabites  would  not  help  them  at  all.  It  was  only 
eventualiter  that  they  sought  this  permission." — IIen(jstenberg,  Diss. 


134  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  headquarters  of  the  camp  were  in  the  Wady  Betemath,  not  at 
the  town  of  Barnea,  which  was  farther  on  in  the  desert  of  Zin. 
The  expression  "  town  of  the  end  of  thy  territory  "  is  not  to  be  under- 
stood as  signifying  that  the  town  belonged  to  the  Edomites,  but 
simply  affirms  that  it  was  situated  on  the  border  of  the  Edomitish 
territory.  The  supposition  that  Barnea  was  an  Edomitish  town  is 
opposed  by  the  circumstance  that,  in  chap,  xxxiv.  4,  and  Josh  xv.  3, 
it  is  reckoned  as  part  of  the  land  of  Canaan ;  that  in  Josh.  x.  41  it 
is  mentioned  as  the  southernmost  town,  where  Joshua  smote  the 
Canaanites  and  conquered  their  land ;  and  lastly,  that  in  Josh.  xv. 
23  it  is  probably  classed  among  the  towns  allotted  to  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  from  which  it  seems  to  follow  that  it  must  have  belonged 
to  the  Amorites.  "  The  end  of  the  territory"  of  the  king  of  Edom 
is  to  be  distinguished  from  "  the  territory  of  the  land  of  Edom"  in 
ver.  23.  The  land  of  Edom  extended  westwards  only  as  far  as  the 
Arabah,  the  low-lying  plain,  which  runp>from  the  southern  point 
of  the  Dead  Sea  to  the  head  of  the  Ela^itic  Gulf.  At  that  time, 
however,  the  Edomites  had  spread  oat  beyond  the  Arabah,  and 
taken  possession  of  a  portion  of  the  desert  of  Paran  belonging  to 
the  peninsula  of  Sinai,  which  was  bounded  on  the  north  by  the 
desert  of  Zin  (see  at  chap,  xxxiv.  3).  By  their  not  drinking  of  the 
water  of  the  wells  (ver.  17),  we  are  to  understand,  according  to  ver. 
19,  their  not  making  use  of  the  wells  of  the  Edomites  either  by 
violence  or  without  compensation.  The  "  king's  way"  is  the  public 
high  road,  which  was  probably  made  at  the  cost  of  the  state,  and 
kept  up  for  the  king  and  his  armies  to  travel  upon,  and  is  synony- 
mous with  the  "sultan-road"  {Derh  es  Sultan)  or  "emperor  road," 
as  the  open,  broad,  old  military  roads  are  still  called  in  the  East  (cf . 
Robinson,  Pal.  ii.  340 ;  Seetzen,  i.  pp.  61,  132,  ii.  pp.  336,  etc.). 

This  military  road  led,  no  doubt,  as  Leake  has  conjectured 
{Burckhardt,  Syr.  pp.  21,  22),  through  the  broad  Wadye^  Ghuweir, 
which  not  only  forms  a  direct  and  easy  passage  to  the  level 
country  through  the  very  steep  mountains  that  fall  down  into  the 
Arabah,  but  also  a  convenient  road  through  the  land  of  Edom 
(Robinson,  ii.  pp.  552,  583,  610),  and  is  celebrated  for  its  splendid 
meadows,  which  are  traceable  to  its  many  springs  {Burckhardt,  pp. 
688,  689)  ;  for  the  broad  Wady  Murreh  runs  from  the  northern 
border  of  the  mountain-land  of  Azazimeh,  not  only  as  far  as  the 
mountain  of  Moddera  (Madurah),  where  it  is  divided,  but  in  its 
southern  half  as  far  as  the  Arabah  (see  p.  59).  This  is  very 
likely  the  "  great  route  through  broad  wadys,"  which  the  Bedouins 


CHAP.  XX.  22-29.  135 

who  accompanied  Rowland  assured  him  "  was  very  good,  and  led 
direct  to  Mount  Hor,  but  with  which  no  European  traveller  was 
acquainted  "  (Ritters  Erdk.  xiv.  p.  1088).  It  probably  opens  into 
the  Arabah  at  the  Wady  el  WeibeJi,  opposite  to  the  Wady  Ghuweir. 
— Vers.  18,  19.  The  Edomites  refused  the  visit  of  the  Israelites  in  a 
most  unbrotherly  manner,  and  threatened  to  come  out  against  them 
with  the  sword,  without  paying  the  least  attention  to  the  repeated 
assurance  of  the  Israelitish  messengers,  that  they  would  only  march 
upon  the  high  road,  and  would  pay  for  water  for  themselves  and 
their  cattle.  "^JT^^^  i^"^?  ^*^*  "  *^  *^  nothing  at  all ;  I  will  go  through 
with  my  feet '.^"^  i.e.  we  want  no  great  thing ;  we  will  only  make  use 
of  the  high  road. — Ver.  20.  To  give  emphasis  to  his  refusal,  Edom 
went  against  Israel  "  with  much  people  and  with  a  strong  hand"  sc. 
when  they  approached  its  borders.  This  statement,  as  well  as  the 
one  in  ver.  21,  that  Israel  turned  away  before  Edom,  anticipates 
the  historical  order  ;  for,  as  a  matter  of  course,  the  Edomites  can- 
not have  come  at  once  with  an  army  on  the  track  of  the  messengers, 
for  the  purpose  of  blocking  up  the  road  through  the  Wady  Murreh, 
which  runs  along  the  border  of  its  territory  to  the  west  of  the 
Arabah. 

Vers.  22-29.  Death  of  Aaron  at  Mount  Hor. — The 
Israelites  left  Kadesh,  and  passed  along  the  road  just  mentioned 
to  Mount  Hor.  This  mountain,  which  was  situated,  according  to 
chap,  xxxiii.  37,  on  the  border  of  the  land  of  Edom,  is  placed  by 
Josephus  (Ant.  iv.  4,  7)  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Petra ;  so  also  by 
JEusehius  and  Jerome :  "  Or  mons,  in  quo  mortuus  est  Aaron,  juxta 
civitatem  PetramJ*  According  to  modern  travellers,  it  is  Mount 
Harun,  on  the  north-western  side  of  Wady  Musa  (Petra),  which 
is  described  by  Robinson  (vol.  ii.  p.  508)  as  "  a  cone  irregularly 
truncated,  having  three  ragged  points  or  peaks,  of  which  that  upon 
the  north-east  is  the  highest,  and  has  upon  it  the  Muhammedan 
Wely,  or  tomb  of  Aaron,"  from  which  the  mountain  has  received 
its  name  "  Ilarun,"  i.e.  Aaron  (vid.  Burckhardt,  Syr.  pp.  715,  716  ; 
V.  Schubert,  Reise,  ii.  pp.  419  sqq. ;  Ritier,  Erdkunde,  xiv.  pp.  1127 
sqq.).  There  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  general  correctness  of  this 
tradition;^  for  even  if  the  Mohammedan  tradition  concerning 
Aaron's  grave  is  not  well  accredited,  the  situation  of  this  mountain 

^  There  is  no  force  whatever  in  the  argaments  by  which  Knohel  has  en- 
deavoured to  prove  that  it  is  incorrect.  The  Jirst  objection,  viz.  that  the 
Hebrews  reached  Mount  Hor  from  Kadesh  in  a  single  march,  has  no  foundatioji 


136  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

is  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  statement  in  ver.  23  and  chap, 
xxxiii.  37,  viz.  that  the  Israelites  had  then  reached  the  border  of 
the  land  of  Edom.  The  place  where  the  people  encamped  is 
called  Mosera  in  Deut.  x.  6,  and  Moseroth  in  the  list  of  stations  in 
chap,  xxxiii.  30,  and  is  at  all  events  to  be  sought  for  in  the  Arabah, 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  Mount  Hor,  though  it  is  altogether  un- 
known to  us.  The  camp  of  600,000  men,  with  their  wives,  chil- 
dren, and  flocks,  would  certainly  require  a  space  miles  wide,  and 
might  therefore  easily  stretch  from  the  mouths  of  the  Wady  el 
Weibeh  and  Wady  Ghuweir,  in  the  Arabah,  to  the  neighbourhood 
of  Mount  Harun.  The  place  of  encampment  is  called  after  this 
mountain,  Hor,  both  here  and  in  chap,  xxxiii.  37  sqq.,  because  it 
was  there  that  Aaron  died  and  was  buried.  The  Lord  foretold  his 
death  to  Moses,  and  directed  him  to  take  off  Aaron's  priestly  robes, 
and  put  them  upon  Eleazar  his  son,  as  Aaron  was  not  to  enter  the 
promised  land,  because  they  (Aaron  and  Moses)  had  opposed  the 
command  of  Jehovah  at  the  water  of  strife  (see  at  ver.  12). 
"Gathered  to  his  people,"  like  the  patriarchs  (Gen.  xxv.  8,  17, 
XXXV.  29,  xlix.  33). — Vers.  27,  28.  Moses  executed  this  command, 
and  Aaron  died  upon  the  top  of  the  mountain,  according  to  chap, 
xxxiii.  37,  38,  on  the  first  day  of  the  fifth  month,  in  the  fortieth 
year  after  the  exodus  from  Egypt,  at  the  age  of  123  years  (which 
agrees  with  Ex.  vii.  7),  and  was  mourned  by  all  Israel  for  thirty 
days. 

in  the  biblical  text,  and  cannot  be  inferred  from  the  circumstance  that  there 
is  no  place  of  encampment  mentioned  between  Kadesh  and  Mount  Hor  ;  for,  on 
the  one  hand,  we  may  clearly  see,  not  only  from  chap.  xxi.  10,  but  even  from 
Ex.  xvii.  1,  as  compared  with  Num.  xxxiii.  41  sqq.  and  12  sqq.,  that  only 
those  places  of  encampment  are  mentioned  in  the  historical  account  where 
events  occurred  that  were  worthy  of  narrating  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is 
evident  from  chap.  x.  33,  that  the  Israelites  sometimes  continued  marching  for 
several  days  before  they  formed  an  encampment  again.  The  second  objection — 
viz.  that  if  Hor  was  near  Petra,  it  is  impossible  to  see  how  the  advance  of  the 
Hebrews  from  Kadesh  to  Hor  could  be  regarded  by  the  king  of  Arad,  who  lived 
more  than  thirty  hours'  journey  to  the  north,  as  coming  (chap,  xxxiii.  40),  not 
to  mention  "  coming  by  the  way  of  the  spies  "  (chap.  xxi.  1),  and  how  this 
king  could  come  into  conflict  with  the  Hebrews  when  posted  at  Petra — rests 
upon  the  erroneous  assumption,  that  the  attack  of  the  king  of  Arad  did  not 
take  place  till  after  the  death  of  Aaron,  because  it  is  not  mentioned  till  after- 
wards. Lastly,  the  tJiird  objection — viz.  that  a  march  from  Kadesh  in  a  south- 
westerly direction  to  Wady  Musa,  and  then  northwards  past  Zalmona  to 
Phunon  (chap,  xxxiii.  41),  is  much  too  adventurous — is  overthrown  by  chap. 
xxi.  4,  where  the  Israelites  are  said  to  have  gone  from  Mount  Hor  by  the  way  of 
the  Red  Sea.     (See  the  notes  on  chap.  xxi.  10.) 


CHAP.  XXI.  1-3.  137 

Chap.  xxi.  1-3.  Victory  of  IsRx^el  over  the  Cattaanitish 
King  of  Arad. — When  this  Canaanitish  king,  who  dwelt  in  the 
Negeb,  i.e.  the  south  of  Palestine  (yid.  chap.  xiii.  17),  heard  that 
Israel  was  coming  the  way  of  the  spies,  he  made  war  upon  the 
Israelites,  and  took  some  of  them  prisoners.  Arad  is  mentioned 
both  here  and  in  the  parallel  passage,  chap,  xxxiii.  40,  and  also  by 
the  side  of  Hormah,  in  Josh.  xii.  14,  as  the  seat  of  a  Canaanitish 
king  (cf.  Judg.  i.  16,  17).  According  to  Eusehius  and  Jerome  in 
the  Onomast.j  it  was  twenty  Roman  miles  to  the  south  of  Hebron, 
and  has  been  preserved  in  the  ruins  of  Tell  Arad,  which  v.  Schubert 
(ii.  pp.  457  sqq.)  and  Robinson  (ii.  pp.  473,  620,  and  624)  saw  in 
the  distance  ;  and,  according  to  Both  in  Petermanns  geographische 
MIttheilungen  (1858,  p.  269),  it  was  situated  to  the  south-east  of 
Kurmul  (Carmel),  in  an  undulating  plain,  without  trees  or  shrubs, 
with  isolated  hills  and  ranges  of  hills  in  all  directions,  among  which 
was  Tell  Arad.  The  meaning  of  ^^nnxn  '^y\  is  uncertain.  The 
LXX.,  Saad.,  and  others,  take  the  word  Atharim  as  the  proper 
name  of  a  place  not  mentioned  again ;  but  the  Chaldee,  Samar.y 
and  Syr.  render  it  with  much  greater  probability  as  an  appellative 
noun  formed  from  "i^in  with  fc<  prosthet.,  and  synonymous  with  ^^''"irinj 
the  spies  (chap.  xiv.  6).  The  way  of  the  spies  was  the  way  through 
the  desert  of  Zin,  which  the  Israelitish  spies  had  previously  taken 
to  Canaan  (chap.  xiii.  21).  The  territory  of  the  king  of  Arad 
extended  to  the  southern  frontier  of  Canaan,  to  the  desert  of  Zin, 
through  which  the  Israelites  went  from  Kadesh  to  Mount  Hor. 
The  Canaanites  attacked  them  when  upon  their  march,  and  made 
some  of  them  prisoners. — Vers.  2,  3.  The  Israelites  then  vowed  to 
the  Lord,  that  if  He  would  give  this  people  into  their  hands,  they 
would  "  ban  "  their  cities  ;  and  the  Lord  hearkened  to  the  request, 
and  deUvered  up  the  Canaanites,  so  that  they  put  them  and  their 
cities  under  the  ban.  (On  the  ban,  see  at  Lev.  xxvii.  28.)  "  And 
they  called  the  place  Hormah,'^  i.e.  banning,  ban-place.  "  The  place  " 
can  only  mean  the  spot  where  the  Canaanites  were  defeated  by 
the  Israelites.  If  the  town  of  Zephath,  or  the  capital  of  Arad,  had 
been  specially  intended,  it  would  no  doubt  have  been  also  men- 
tioned, as  in  Judg.  i.  17.  As  it  was  not  the  intention  of  Moses  to 
press  into  Canaan  from  the  south,  across  the  steep  and  difficult 
mountains,  for  the  purpose  of  effecting  its  conquest,  the  Israelites 
could  very  well  content  themselves  for  the  present  with  the  defeat 
inflicted  upon  the  Canaanites,  and  defer  the  complete  execution  of 
their  vow  until  the  time  when  they  liad  gained  a  firm  footing  in 


138  THE  FOUKTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


Canaan.  The  banning  of  the  Ganaanites  of  Arad  and  its  cities 
necessarily  presupposed  the  immediate  conquest  of  the  whole  terri- 
tory, and  the  laying  of  all  its  cities  in  ashes.  And  so,  again,  the 
introduction  of  a  king  of  Hormahj  i,e.  Zephath,  among  the  kings 
defeated  by  Joshua  (Josh.  xii.  14),  is  no  proof  that  Zephath  was 
conquered  and  called  Hormah  in  the  time  of  Moses.  Zephath  may 
be  called  Hormah  proleptically  both  there  and  in  Josh.  xix.  4,  as 
being  the  southernmost  border  town  of  the  kingdom  of  Arad,  in 
consequence  of  the  ban  suspended  by  Moses  over  the  territory  of 
the  king  of  Arad,  and  may  not  have  received  this  name  till  after  its 
conquest  by  the  Judaeans  and  Simeonites.  At  the  same  time,  it  is 
quite  conceivable  that  Zephath  may  have  been  captured  in  the  time 
of  Joshua,  along  with  the  other  towns  of  the  south,  and  called 
Hormah  at  that  time,  but  that  the  Israelites  could  not  hold  it  then  ; 
and  therefore,  after  the  departure  of  the  Israelitish  army,  the  old 
name  was  restored  by  the  Ganaanites,  or  rather  only  retained,  until 
the  city  was  retaken  and  permanently  held  IJj  the  Israelites  after 
Joshua's  death  (Judg.  i.  16,  17),  and  receiveil  the  new  name  once 
for  all.  The  allusion  to  Hormah  here,  and  in  chap.  xiv.  45,  does 
not  warrant  the  opinion  in  any  case,  that  it  was  subsequently  to 
the  death  of  Moses  and  the  conquest  of  Ganaan  under  Joshua  that 
the  war  with  the  Ganaanites  of  Arad  and  their  overthrow  occurred. 

March  round  the  land  of  Edom  and  Moah.     Conquest  of  Sihon  and 
•  Og,  kings  of  the  Amorites, — Ghap.  xxi.  4-35. 

Vers.  4-9.  March  of  Israel  through  the  Arabah. 
Plague  of  Serpents,  and  Brazen  Serpent. — Yer.  4.  As  the 
Edomites  refused  a  passage  through  their  land  when  the  Israelites 
left  Mount  Hor,  they  were  obliged  to  take  the  way  to  the  Ked  Sea, 
in  order  to  go  round  the  land  of  Edom,  that  is  to  say,  to  go  down 
the  Arabah  to  the  head  of  the  Elanitic  Gulf. — Vers.  5,  6.  As  they 
went  along  this  road  the  people  became  impatient  ("the  soul  of 
the  people  was  much  discouraged,"  see  Ex.  vi.  9),  and  they  began 
once  more  to  murmur  against  God  and  Moses,  because  they  had 
neither  bread  nor  water  (cf.  chap.  xx.  4  sqq.),  and  were  tired  of 
the  loose,  i.e.  poor,  food  of  manna  (''i^^i?  from  ?/ij).  The  low-lying 
plain  of  the  Arabah,  which  runs  between  steep  mountain  walls  from 
the  Dead  Sea  to  the  Red  Sea,  would  be  most  likely  to  furnish  the 
Israelites  with  very  little  food,  except  the  manna  which  God  gave 
them ;  for  although  it  is  not  altogether  destitute  of  vegetation, 
especially  at  the  mouths  of  the  wadys  and  winter  torrents  from 


I 


CHAP.  XXL  4-9.  139 

the  hills,  yet  on  the  whole  it  is  a  horrible  desert,  with  a  loose  sandy 
soil,  and  drifts  of  granite  and  other  stones,  where  terrible  sand- 
storms sometimes  arise  from  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Red  Sea 
(see  V.  Schuberty  R.  ii.  pp.  396  sqq.,  and  Bitter,  Erdh  xiv.  pp.  1013 
sqq.)  ;  and  the  want  of  food  might  very  frequently  be  accompanied 
by  the  absence  of  drinkable  water.  The  people  rebelled  in  conse- 
quence, and  were  punished  by  the  Lord  w^ith  fiery  serpents,  the 
bite  of  which  caused  many  to  die.  D''B*15^  D"'K^n3,  lit,  burning  snakes, 
so  called  from  their  burning,  i.e,  inflammatory  bite,  which  filled 
with  heat  and  poison,  just  as  many  of  the  snakes  were  called  by  the 
Greeks,  e.g.  the  Bcyjrd<;,  irprjaTripe^j  and  Kavaayve^  {^Dioscor,  vii.  13  : 
Aelian.  nat.  anim.  vi.  51),  not  from  the  skin  of  these  snakes  with 
fiery  red  spots,  which  are  frequently  found  in  the  Arabah,  and 
are  very  poisonous.^ — Ver.  7.  This  punishment  brought  the  people 
to  reflection.  They  confessed  their  sin  to  Moses,  and  entreated 
him  to  deliver  them  from  the  plague  through  his  intercession  with 
the  Lord.  And  the  Lord  helped  them  ;  in  such  a  way,  however, 
that  the  reception  of  help  was  made  to  depend  upon  the  faith  of 
the  people. — Vers.  8,  9.  At  the  command  of  God,  Moses  made  a 
brazen  serpent,  and  put  it  upon  a  standard.^  Whoever  then  of  the 
persons  bitten  by  the  poisonous  serpents  looked  at  the  brazen  ser- 
pent with  faith  in  the  promise  of  God,  lived,  i.e.  recovered  from 
the  serpent's  bite.  The  serpent  was  to  be  made  of  brass  or  copper, 
because  the  colour  of  this  metal,  when  the  sun  was  shining  upon  it, 
was  most  like  the  appearance  of  the  fiery  serpents ;  and  thus  the 
symbol  would  be  more  like  the  thing  itself. 

Even  in  the  book  of  Wisdom  (chap.  xvi.  6,  7),  the  brazen  ser- 
pent is  called  "  a  symbol  of  salvation  ;  for  he  that  turned  himself 
toward  it  was  not  saved  by  the  thing  that  he  saw,  but  by  Thee, 

^  This  is  the  account  given  by  v.  Schubert^  R.  ii.  p.  406  :  "  In  the  afternoon 
they  brought  us  a  very  mottled  snake  of  a  large  size,  marked  with  fiery  red 
spots  and  wavy  stripes,  which  belonged  to  the  most  poisonous  species,  as  the 
formation  of  its  teeth  clearly  showed.  According  to  the  assertion  of  the  Be- 
douins, these  snakes,  which  they  greatly  dreaded,  were  very  common  in  that 
neighbourhood." 

2  For  the  different  views  held  by  early  writers  concerning  the  brazen  ser- 
pent, see  Buxtorf^  historia  serp.  aen.,  in  his  Exercitt.  pp.  468  sqq.  ;  Deyling^ 
observatt.  ss.  ii.  obs.  15,  pp.  156  sqq. ;  Vitriuga,  observ.  ss.  1,  pp.  403  sqq. ;  Jo. 
March,  Scripturariae  Exercitt.  exerc.  8,  pp.  465  sqq. ;  lluth,  Serpens  exaltatus 
non  contritoris  sed  conterendi  imago,  Erl.  1758  ;  Gottfr.  Menken  on  the  brazen 
serpent  ;  Sack,  Apologetik,  2  Ausg.  pp.  355  sqq.  Hofmann,  Wcissagung  u. 
Erfullung,  ii.  pp.  142,  143  ;  Kurtz,  History  of  the  Old  Covenant,  iii.  345  sqq. ; 
and  the  commentators  on  John  iii.  14  and  15. 


140  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

that  art  the  Saviour  of  all."  It  was  not  merely  intended,  however, 
as  Eiuald  supposes  (Gesch.  ii.  p.  228),  as  a  "sign  that  just  as  this 
serpent  hung  suspended  in  the  air,  bound  and  rendered  harmless 
by  the  command  of  Jehovah,  so  every  one  who  looked  at  this  with 
faith  in  the  redeeming  power  of  Jehovah,  was  secured  against  the 
evil, — a  figurative  sign,  therefore,  like  that  of  St  George  and  the 
Dragon  among  ourselves  ;"  for,  according  to  this,  there  would  be  no 
internal  causal  link  between  the  fiery  serpents  and  the  brazen  image 
of  a  serpent.  It  was  rather  intended  as  a  figurative  representation 
of  the  poisonous  serpents,  rendered  harmless  by  the  mercy  of  God. 
For  God  did  not  cause  a  real  serpent  to  be  taken,  but  the  image  of 
a  serpent,  in  which  the  fiery  serpent  was  stiffened,  as  it  were,  into 
dead  brass,  as  a  sign  that  the  deadly  poison  of  the  fiery  serpents 
was  overcome  in  this  brazen  serpent.  This  is  not  to  be  regarded 
as  a  symbol  of  the  divine  healing  power;  nor  is  the  selection  of 
such  a  symbol  to  be  deduced  and  explained,  as  it  is  by  Winery 
Kurtz,  Knohel,  and  others,  from  the  symbolical  view  that  was 
common  to  all  the  heathen  religions  of  antiquity,  that  the  serpent 
was  a  beneficent  and  health-bringing  power,  which  led  to  its  being 
exalted  into  a  symbol  of  the  healing  power,  and  a  representation  of 
the  gods  of  healing.  This  heathen  view  is  not  only  foreign  to  the 
Old  Testament,  and  without  any  foundation  in  the  fact  that,  in  the 
time  of  Hezekiah,  the  people  paid  a  superstitious  worship  to  the 
brazen  serpent  erected  by  Moses  (2  Kings  xviii.  4) ;  but  it  is  irre- 
concilably opposed  to  the  biblical  view  of  the  serpent,  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  evil,  which  was  founded  upon  Gen.  iii.  15,  and  is  only 
traceable  to  the  magical  art  of  serpent-charming,  which  the  Old 
Testament  abhorred  as  an  idolatrous  abomination.  To  this  we  may 
add,  that  the  thought  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  this  explana- 
tion, viz.  that  poison  is  to  be  cured  by  poison,  has  no  support  in 
Hos.  xiii.  4,  but  is  altogether  foreign  to  the  Scriptures.  God 
punishes  sin,  it  is  true,  by  sin ;  but  He  neither  cures  sin  by  sin,  nor 
death  by  death.  On  the  contrary,  to  conquer  sin  it  was  necessary 
that  the  Redeemer  should  be  without  sin ;  and  to  take  away  its 
power  from  death,  it  was  requisite  that  Christ,  the  Prince  of  life, 
who  had  life  in  Himself,  should  rise  again  from  death  and  the 
grave  (John  v.  2Q,  xi.  25  ;  Acts  iii.  15  ;  2  Tim.  i.  10). 

The  brazen  serpent  became  a  symbol  of  salvation  on  the  three 
grounds  which  Luther  pointed  out.  In  the  first  place,  the  serpent 
which  Moses  was  to  make  by  the  command  of  God  was  to  be  of 
brass  or  copper,  that  is  to  say,  of  a  reddish  colour,  and  (although 


I 


CHAP.  XXI.  10-20.  141 

witliout  poison)  altogether  like  the  persons  who  were  red  and  burn- 
ing with  heat  because  of  the  bite  of  the  fiery  serpents.  In  the 
second  place,  the  brazen  serpent  was  to  be  set  up  upon  a  pole  for  a 
sign.  And  in  the  third  place,  those  who  desired  to  recover  from 
the  fiery  serpent's  bite  and  live,  were  to  look  at  the  brazen  serpent 
upon  the  pole,  otherwise  they  could  not  recover  or  live  {Luther  s 
Sermon  on  John  iii.  1-15).  It  was  in  these  three  points,  as  Luther 
has  also  clearly  shown,  that  the  typical  character  of  this  symbol 
lay,  to  which  Christ  referred  in  His  conversation  with  Nicodemus 
(John  iii.  14).  The  brazen  serpent  had  the  form  of  a  real  serpent, 
but  was  "  without  poison,  and  altogether  harmless."  So  God  sent 
His  Son  in  the  form  of  sinful  flesh,  and  yet  without  sin  (Rom. 
viii.  3;  2  Cor.  v.  21;  1  Pet.  ii.  22-24).— 2.  In  the  lifting  up  of 
the  serpent  as  a  standard.  This  was  a  Bei/y/jLarl^eiv  iv  7rappT]o-[a, 
a  OpiafjLpeveLv  (a  "  showing  openly,"  or  "  triumphing"),  a  triumphal 
exhibition  of  the  poisonous  serpents  as  put  to  death  in  the  brazen 
image,  just  as  the  lifting  up  of  Christ  upon  the  cross  was  a  public 
triumph  over  the  evil  principalities  and  powers  below  the  sky  (Col. 
ii.  14,  15). — 3.  In  the  cure  effected  through  looking  at  the  image 
of  the  serpent.  Just  as  the  Israelites  had  to  turn  their  eyes  to  the 
brazen  serpent  in  believing  obedience  to  the  word  of  the  Lord,  in 
order  to  be  cured  of  the  bite  of  the  poisonous  serpents,  so  must  we 
look  with  faith  at  the  Son  of  man  lifted  up  upon  the  cross,  if  we 
would  be  delivered  from  the  bite  of  the  old  serpent,  from  sin,  death, 
the  devil,  and  hell.  "  Christ  is  the  antitype  of  the  serpent,  inas- 
much as  He  took  upon  Himself  the  most  pernicious  of  all  pernicious 
potencies,  viz.  sin,  and  made  a  vicarious  atonement  for  it"  {Heng- 
stenberg  on  John  iii.  14).  The  brazen  image  of  the  serpent  was 
taken  by  the  Israelites  to  Canaan,  and  preserved  till  the  time  of 
Hezekiah,  who  had  it  broken  in  pieces,  because  the  idolatrous 
people  had  presented  incense-offerings  to  this  holy  relic  (2  Kings 
xviii.  4). 

Vers.  10-20.  Maech  of  Israel  round  Edom  and  Moab, 
TO  THE  Heights  of  Pisgah  in  the  Field  of  Moab  (cf.  chap, 
xxxiii.  41-47). — Ver.  10.  From  the  camp  in  the  Arabah,  which  is 
not  more  particularly  described,  where  the  murmuring  people  were 
punished  by  fiery  serpents,  Israel  removed  to  Oboth,  According  to 
the  list  of  stations  in  chap,  xxxiii.  41  sqq.,  they  went  from  Hor  to 
Zalmonah,  the  situation  of  which  has  not  been  determined ;  for  C.  v. 
Raumer^s  conjecture  {der  Zug  der  Israeliten,  p.  45),  that  it  was  the 


142  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


same  place  as  the  modern  Maan,  has  no  firm  basis  in  the  fact  that 
Maan  is  a  station  of  the  Syrian  pilgrim  caravans.  From  Zalmonah 
they  went  to  Phunorij  and  only  then  to  Ohoth.  The  name  Phunon 
is  no  doubt  the  same  as  Phinon,  a  tribe-seat  of  the  Edomitish  Phy- 
larch  (Gen.  xxxvi.  41) ;  and  according  to  Jerome  (Onom.  s.  v,  Fenon), 
it  was  "  a  little  village  in  the  desert,  where  copper  was  dug  up  by 
condemned  criminals  (see  at  Gen.  xxxvi.  41),  between  Petra  and 
Zoar."  This  statement  suits  very  well,  provided  we  imagine  the 
situation  of  Phunon  to  have  been  not  in  a  straight  line  between  Petra 
and  Zoar,  but  more  to  the  east,  between  the  mountains  on  the  edge 
of  the  desert.  For  the  Israelites  unquestionably  went  from  the 
southern  end  of  the  Arabah  to  the  eastern  side  of  Idumsea,  through 
the  Wady  el  Ithm  (^Getum),  which  opens  into  the  Arabah  from  the 
east,  a  few  hours  to  the  north  of  Akaba  and  the  ancient  Ezion-geber. 
They  had  then  gone  round  the  mountains  of  Edom,  and  begun  to 
"  turn  to  the  north"  (Deut.  ii.  3),  so  that  they  now  proceeded 
farther  northwards,  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  mountains  of  Edom, 
"  through  the  territory  of  the  sons  of  Esau,"  no  doubt  by  the  same 
road  which  is  taken  in  the  present  day  by  the  caravans  which  go 
from  Gaza  to  Maan,  through  the  Ghor.  "  This  runs  upon  a  grassy 
ridge,  forming  the  western  border  of  the  coast  of  Arabia,  and  the 
eastern  border  of  the  cultivated  land,  which  stretches  from  the  land 
of  Edom  to  the  sources  of  the  Jordan,  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
Ghor"  (y,  Raumer,  Zug,  p.  45).  On  the  western  side  of  their  moun- 
tains the  Edomites  had  refused  permission  to  the  Israelites  to  pass 
through  their  land  (chap.  xx.  18  sqq.),  as  the  mountains  of  Seir 
terminate  towards  the  Ghor  (the  Arabah)  in  steep  and  lofty  preci- 
pices, and  there  are  only  two  or  three  narrow  wadys  which  intersect 
them  from  west  to  east ;  and  of  these  the  Wady  Ghuweir  is  the  only 
one  which  is  practicable  for  an  army,  and  even  this  could  be  held 
so  securely  by  a  moderate  army,  that  no  enemy  could  force  its  way 
into  the  heart  of  the  country  (see  Leake  in  Burckhardt,  pp.  21,  22 ; 
and  Robinson,  ii.  p.  583).  It  was  different  on  the  eastern  side, 
where  the  mountains  slope  off  into  a  wide  extent  of  table-land, 
which  is  only  slightly  elevated  above  the  desert  of  Arabia.  Here, 
on  the  weaker  side  of  their  frontier,  the  Edomites  lost  the  heart  to 
make  any  attack  upon  the  Israelites,  who  would  now  have  been  able 
to  requite  their  hostilities.  But  the  Lord  had  commanded  Israel 
not  to  make  war  upon  the  sons  of  Esau ;  but  when  passing  through 
their  territory,  to  purchase  food  and  water  from  them  for  money 
(Deut.  ii.  4-6).     The  Edomites  submitted  to  the  necessity,  and 


t 


CHAP.  XXL  11.  143 

endeavoured  to  take  advantage  of  it,  by  selling  provisions,  "  in  the 
same  way  in  which,  at  the  present  day,  the  caravan  from  Mecca  is 
supplied  with  provisions  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  mountains  along 
the  pilgrim  road"  {Leake  in  Burckhardtj  p.  24).  The  situation  of 
Ohoth  cannot  be  determined. 

Yer.  11.  The  next  encampment  was  "  Ije-Abarim  in  the  desert, 
which  lies  before  Moab  towards  the  sun-rising,"  i.e.  on  the  eastern 
border  of  Moabitis  (chap,  xxxiii.  44).  As  the  Wady  el  Ahsy,  which 
runs  into  the  Dead  Sea,  in  a  deep  and  narrow  rocky  bed,  from  the 
south-east,  and  is  called  el  Kerahy  in  its  lower  part  (Burckhardtj 
Syr.  pp.  673-4),  separates  Idumsea  from  Moabitis ;  Ije-Aharim 
(i.e.  ruins  of  the  crossings  over)  must  be  sought  for  on  the  border 
of  Moab  to  the  north  of  this  wady,  but  is  hardly  to  be  found,  as 
Knobel  supposes,  on  the  range  of  hills  called  el  Tarfuye,  which  is 
known  by  the  name  of  Orokaraye^  still  farther  to  the  south,  and 
terminates  on  the  south-west  of  Kerek,  whilst  towards  the  north  it 
is  continued  in  the  range  of  hills  called  el  Ghoweithe  and  the  moun- 
tain range  of  el  Zohle;  even  supposing  that  the  term  Abarim,  "  the 
passages  or  sides,"  is  to  be  understood  as  referring  to  these  ranges 
of  hills  and  mountains  which  skirt  the  land  of  the  Amorites  and 
Moabites,  and  form  the  enclosing  sides.  For  the  boundary  line 
between  the  hills  of  eUTarfuye  and  those  of  el- Ghoweithe  is  so  near 
to  the  Arnon,  that  there  is  not  the  necessary  space  between  it  and 
the  Arnon  for  the  encampment  at  the  brook  Zared  (ver.  12).  Ije- 
Abarim  or  Jim  cannot  have  been  far  from  the  northern  shore  of 
the  el  Ahsy,  and  was  probably  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Kalaat  el 
Hassa  (Ahsa),  the  source  of  the  Ahsy,  and  a  station  for  the  pilgrim 
caravans  (Burckhardt,  p.  1035).  As  the  Moabites  were  also  not  to 
be  attacked  by  the  Israelites  (Deut.  ii.  9  sqq.),  they  passed  along 
the  eastern  border  of  Moabitis  as  far  as  the  brook  Zared  (ver.  12). 
This  can  hardly  have  been  the  Wady  el-Ahsy  {Robinson,  ii.  p.  555 ; 
JEwald,  Gesch.  ii.  p.  259  ;  Ritter,  Erdk.  xv.  p.  689)  ;  for  that  must 
already  have  been  crossed  when  they  came  to  the  border  of  Moab 
(ver.  11).  Nor  can  it  well  have  been  "the  brook  Zaide,  which  runs 
from  the  south-east,  passes  between  the  mountain  ranges  of  Gho- 
weithe  and  Tarfuye,  and  enters  the  Arnon,  of  which  it  forms  the 
leading  source," — the  view  adopted  by  Knobel,  on  the  very  ques- 
tionable ground  that  the  name  is  a  corruption  of.  Zared.  In  all 
probability  it  was  the  Wady  Kerek,  in  the  upper  part  of  its  course, 
not  far  from  Katrane,  on  the  pilgrim  road  {v.  Raumer,  Zug,  p.  47 ; 
Kurtz,  and  others). — Ver.  13.  The  next  encampment  was  "  beyond 


144  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

(i.e.  by  the  side  of)  the  Arnouj  which  is  in  the  desert^  and  that  cometh 
out  of  the  territory  of  the  AmoritesJ'  The  Arnon,  i.e.  the  present 
Wady  Mojeb,  is  formed  by  the  union  of  the  Seyl  (i.e.  brook  or  river) 
Saide,  which  comes  from  the  south-east,  not  far  from  Katrane,  on  the 
pilgrim  road,  and  the  Lejum  from  the  north-east,  which  receives  the 
small  rivers  el  Mekhreys  and  Balua,  the  latter  flowing  from  the  pil- 
grim station  Kalaat  Balua,  and  then  continues  its  course  to  the  Dead 
Sea,  through  a  deep  and  narrow  valley,  shut  in  by  very  steep  and 
lofty  cliffs,  and  covered  with  blocks  of  stone,  that  have  been  brought 
down  from  the  loftier  ground  (BurcTchardt,  pp.  633  sqq.),  so  that  there 
are  only  a  few  places  where  it  is  passable ;  and  consequently  a  wan- 
dering people  like  the  Israelites  could  not  have  crossed  the  Mojeb 
itself  to  force  an  entrance  into  the  territory  of  the  hostile  Amorites.^ 
For  the  Arnon  formed  the  boundary  between  Moab  and  the  country 
of  the  Amorites.  The  spot  where  Israel  encamped  on  the  Arnon 
must  be  sought  for  in  the  upper  part  of  its  course,  where  it  is  still 
flowing  "  in  the  desert ;"  not  at  Wady  Zaide,  however,  although 
Burchhardt  calls  this  the  main  source  of  the  Mojeb,  but  at  the  Balua, 
which  flows  into  the  Lejum.  In  all  probability  these  streams,  of 
which  the  Lejum  came  from  the  north,  already  bore  the  name  of 
Arnon ;  as  we  may  gather  from  the  expression,  "  that  cometh  out 
of  the  coasts  of  the  Amorites."  The  place  of  Israel's  encampment, 
"  beyond  the  Arnon  in  the  desert,^  is  to  be  sought  for,  therefore,  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Kalaat  Balua,  and  on  the  south  side  of  the 
Arnon  (Balua).  This  is  evident  enough  from  Deut.  ii.  24,  26  sqq., 
where  the  Israelites  are  represented  as  entering  the  territory  of  the 
Amoritish  king  Sihon,  when  they  crossed  the  Arnon,  having  first 
of  all  sent  a  deputation,  with  a  peaceable  request  for  permission  to 
pass  through  his  land  (cf.  vers.  21  sqq.).  Although  this  took  place, 
according  to  Deut.  ii.  26,  "  out  of  the  wilderness  of  Kedemoth,''  an 
Amoritish  town,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  the  Israelites  had 
already  crossed  the  Arnon  and  entered  the  territory  of  the  Amorites, 
but  only  that  they  were  standing  on  the  border  of  it,  and  in  the 
desert  which  took  its  name  from  Kedemoth,  and  ran  up  to  this, 
the  most  easterly  town,  as  the  name  seems  to  imply,  of  the  country 
of  the  Amorites.    After  the  conquest  of  the  country,  Kedemoth  was 

^  It  is  utterly  inconceivable  that  a  whole  people,  travelling  with  all  their 
possessions  as  well  as  with  their  flocks,  should  have  been  exposed  without  neces- 
sity to  the  dangers  and  enormous  difficulties  that  would  attend  the  crossing  of 
so  dreadfully  wild  and  so  deep  a  valley,  and  that  merely  for  the  purpose  of 
forcing  an  entrance  into  an  enemy's  country. — Patter^  Erdk.  xv.  p.  1207. 


CHAP.  XXL  14,  15.  145 

allotted  to  the  Reuhenites  (Josh.  xiii.  18),  and  made  into  a  Levitical 
city  (Josh.  xxi.  37  ;  1  Chron.  vi.  64). 

The  Israelites  now  received  instructions  from  the  Lord,  to  cross 
the  river  Amon,  and  make  war  upon  the  Amoritish  king  Sihon  of 
Heshbon,  and  take  possession  of  his  land,  with  the  assurance  that 
the  Lord  had  given  Sihon  into  the  hand  of  Israel,  and  would  fill 
all  nations  before  them  with  fear  and  trembling  (Deut.  ii.  24,  25). 
This  summons,  with  its  attendant  promises,  not  only  filled  the 
Israelites  with  courage  and  strength  to  enter  upon  the  conflict  with 
the  mightiest  of  all  the  tribes  of  the  Canaanites,  but  inspired  poets 
in  the  midst  of  them  to  commemorate  in  odes  the  wars  of  Jehovah, 
and  His  victories  over  His  foes.  A  few  verses  are  given  here  out 
of  one  of  these  odes  (vers.  14  sqq.),  not  for  the  purpose  of  verifying 
the  geographical  statement,  that  the  Arnon  touches  the  border  of 
Moabitis,  or  that  the  Israelites  had  only  arrived  at  the  border  of  the 
Moabite  and  Amorite  territory,  but  as  an  evidence  that  there,  on  the 
borders  of  Moab,  the  Israelites  had  been  inspired  through  the  divine 
promises  with  the  firm  assurance  that  they  should  be  able  to  conquer 
the  land  of  the  Amorites  which  lay  before  them. — Vers.  14,  15. 
"  Therefore^''  sc.  because  the  Lord  had  thus  given  king  Sihon,  with 
all  his  land,  into  the  hand  of  Israel,  "  it  is  written  in  the  book  of  the 
wars  of  the  Lord :  Vaheb  (Jehovah  takes)  in  storm,  and  the  brooks  of 
Arnon  and  the  valley  of  the  brooks,  which  turns  to  the  dwelling  of  Ar, 
and  leans  upon  the  border  of  Moab"  The  book  of  the  wars  of  Jehovah 
is  neither  an  Amoritish  book  of  the  conflicts  of  Baal,  in  which  the 
warlike  feats  performed  by  Sihon  and  other  Amoritish  heroes  with 
the  help  of  Baal  were  celebrated  in  verse,  as  G.  Unruh  fabulously 
asserts  in  his  Zug  der  Isr.  aus  JEg.  nach  Canaan  (p.  130),  nor  a  work 
"  dating  from  the  time  of  Jehoshaphat,  containing  the  early  history 
of  the  Israelites,  from  the  Hebrew  patriarchs  till  past  the  time  of 
Joshua,  with  the  law  interwoven,"  which  is  the  character  that 
KnobeVs  critical  fancy  would  stamp  upon  it,  but  a  collection  of  odes 
of  the  time  of  Moses  himself,  in  celebration  of  the  glorious  acts  of 
the  Lord  to  and  for  the  Israelites ;  and  '•'  the  quotation  bears  the 
same  relation  to  the  history  itself,  as  the  verses  of  Korner  would 
bear  to  the  writings  of  any  historian  of  the  wars  of  freedom,  who 
had  himself  taken  part  in  these  wars,  and  introduced  the  verses 
into  his  own  historical  work"  (Hengstenberg)}    The  strophe  selected 

^  "  That  such  a  book  should  arise  in  the  last  days  of  Moses,  when  the  youthful 
generation  began  for  the  first  time  to  regard  and  manifest  itself,  both  vigorously 
and  generally,  as  the  army  of  Jehovah,  is  so  far  from  being  a  surprising  fact, 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  K 


14G  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

from  tlie  ode  has  neither  subject  nor  verb  in  it,  as  the  ode  was  well 
Imown  to  the  contemporaries,  and  what  had  to  be  supphed  could 
easily  be  gathered  from  the  title,  ^^  Wars  of  Jehovah."  VaJieb  is  no 
doubt  the  proper  name  of  an  Amoritish  fortress ;  and  ns^Dn,  <'  in 
storm,"  is  to  be  explained  according  to  Nah.  i.  3,  "  The  Lord,  in 
the  storm  is  His  way."  "  Advancing  in  storm.  He  took  Vaheb  and 
the  brooks  of  Arnon,"  i.e.  the  different  wadys,  valleys  cut  by  brooks, 
which  open  into  the  Arnon.  Dvnin  '^^^^  lit.  pouring  of  the  brooks, 
from  ^'^^,  effasioj  the  pouring,  then  the  place  where  brooks  pour 
down,  the  slope  of  mountains  or  hills,  for  which  the  term  nn^K 
is  generally  used  in  the  plural,  particularly  to  denote  the  slopes  of 
the  mountains  of  Pisgah  (Deut.  iii.  17,  iv.  49  ;  Josh.  xii.  3,  xiii.  20), 
and  the  hilly  region  of  Palestine,  which  formed  the  transition  from 
the  mountains  to  the  plain  (Josh.  x.  40  and  xii.  8).  ^r^^,  the 
dwelling,  used  poetically  for  the  dwelling-place,  as  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  7 
and  Obad.  3.  "^V  (^^),  the  antiquated  form  for  "i"*J^,  a  city,  is  the 
same  as  Ar  Moah  in  ver.  28  and  Isa.  xv.  1,  "  the  city  of  Moab,  on 
the  border  of  the  Arnon,  which  is  at  the  end  of  the  (Moabitish) 
territory"  (chap.  xxii.  36).  It  was  called  Areopolis  by  the  Greeks, 
and  was  near  to  Aroer  (Deut.  ii.  36  and  Josh.  xiii.  9),  probably 
standing  at  the  confluence  of  the  Lejum  and  Mojeb,  in  the  "  fine 
green  pasture  land,  in  the  midst  of  which  there  is  a  hill  with  some 
ruins,"  and  not  far  away  the  ruin  of  a  small  castle,  with  a  heap  of 
broken  columns  (Burckhardt,  Syr.  p.  636).  This  Ar  is  not  to  be 
identified  with  the  modern  Eahba,  in  the  midst  of  the  land  of  the 
Moabites,  six  hours  to  the  south  of  Lejum,  to  which  the  name 
Areopolis  was  transferred  in  the  patristic  age,  probably  after  the 
destruction  of  Ar,  the  ancient  Areopolis,  by  an  earthquake,  of  which 
Jerome  gives  an  account  in  connection  with  his  own  childhood  (see 
his  Com.  on  Isa.  xv.),  possibly  the  earthquake  which  occurred  in 
the  year  a.d.  342,  and  by  which  many  cities  of  the  East  were  de- 
stroyed, and  among  others  Nicomedia  (cf.  Hengstenherg,  Balaam., 
pp.  525-528  ;  Bitter,  Erdhunde,  xv.  pp.  1212  sqq. ;  and  v.  Baumer, 
Balastina,  pp.  270,  271,  Ed.  4). 

that  we  can  scarcely  imagine  a  more  suitable  time  for  the  commencement  of 
such  a  work"  (Baumgarten).  And  if  this  is  the  case,  the  allusion  to  this  collection 
of  odes  cannot  be  adduced  as  an  argument  against  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the 
Pentateuch,  since  Moses  certainly  did  not  write  out  the  history  of  the  journey 
from  Kadesh  to  the  Arboth  Moab  until  after  the  two  kings  of  the  Amorites  had 
been  defeated,  and  the  land  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan  conquered,  or  till  the 
Israelites  had  encamped  in  the  steppes  of  Moab,  opposite  to  Jericho. 


CHAP.  XXI.  16-20.  147 

Vers.  16-18.  They  proceeded  thence  to  Beer  (a  well),  a  place 
of  encampment  which  received  its  name  from  the  fact  that  here 
God  gave  the  people  water,  not  as  before  by  a  miraculous  supply 
from  a  rock,  but  by  commanding  wells  to  be  dug.  This  is  evident 
from  the  ode  with  which  the  congregation  commemorated  this 
divine  gift  of  grace.  "  Then  Israel  sang  this  song :  Spring  up,  0 
well !  Sing  ye  to  it  I  Well  which  princes  dug,  which  the  nobles 
of  the  people  hollowed  out,  with  the  sceptre,  with  their  staves^  TO^ 
as  in  Ex.  xv.  21  and  xxxii.  18.  Ppno,  ruler's  staff,  cf.  Gen.  xlix. 
10.  Beer,  probably  the  same  as  Beer  Elim  (Isa.  xv.  8),  on  the 
north-east  of  Moab,  was  in  the  desert ;  for  the  Israelites  proceeded 
tlience  '^  from  the  desert  to  Mattanah^^  (ver.  18),  thence  to  Nahaliel, 
and  thence  to  Bamoth.  According  to  Eusehius  (cf.  Reland,  Pal, 
ill,  p.  495),  Mattanah  {MadOave/j.)  was  by  the  valley  of  the  Arnon, 
twelve  Roman  miles  to  the  east  (or  more  properly  south-east  or 
south)  of  Medahah,  and  is  probably  to  be  seen  in  ledun,  a  place 
now  lying  in  ruins,  near  the  source  of  the  Lejum  {Burchhardt, 
pp.  635,  636 ;  Hengstenherg,  Balaam,  p.  530 ;  Knohel,  and  others). 
The  name  of  Nahaliel  is  still  retained  in  the  form  Encheileh,  This 
is  the  name  given  to  the  Lejum,  after  it  has  been  joined  by 
the  Balua,  until  its  junction  with  the  Saide  {Burchhardt,  p.  635). 
Consequently  the  Israelites  went  from  Beer  in  the  desert,  in  a 
north-westerly  direction  to  Tedun,  then  westwards  to  the  northern 
bank  of  the  Encheileh,  and  then  still  farther  in  a  north-westerly 
and  northerly  direction  to  Bamoth,  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
Bamoth  is  identical  with  Bamoth  Baal,  i,e,  heights  of  Baal  (chap, 
xxii.  4).  According  to  Josh.  xiii.  17  (cf.  Isa.  xv.  2),  Bamoth  was 
near  to  Dihon  {Dihan),  between  the  Wady  Wale  and  Wady  Mojeb, 
and  also  to  Beth-Baal  Meon,  i,e,  Myun,  half  a  German  mile  (2J 
English)  to  the  south  of  Heshbon ;  and,  according  to  chap.  xxii. 
41,  you  could  see  Bamoth  Baal  from  the  extremity  of  the  Israelitish 
camp  in  the  steppes  of  Moab.  Consequently  Bamoth  cannot  be 
the  mountain  to  the  south  of  Wady  Wale,  upon  the  top  of  which 
Burchhardt  says  there  is  a  very  beautiful  plain  (p.  632  ;  see  Heng^ 
stenherg,  Balaam,  p.  532)  ;  because  the  steppes  of  Moab  cannot  be 
seen  at  all  from  this  plain,  as  they  are  covered  by  the  Jebel  Attarus.. 
It  is  rather  a  height  upon  the  long  mountain  Attarus,  which  runs 
along  the  southern  shore  of  the  Zerka  Maein,  and  may  possibly  be. 
a  spot  upon  the  summit  of  the  Jebel  Attarus,  "  the  highest  point, 
in  the  neighbourhood,"  upon  which,  according  to  Burchhardt  (p. 
630),  there  is  "  a  heap  of   stones  overshadowed  by  a  very  large 


148  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

pistachio-tree."  A  little  farther  down  to  the  south-west  of  this  lies 
the  fallen  town  Kereijat  (called  Korriat  by  Seetzen,  ii.  p.  342),  i.e. 
Kerioth,  Jer.  xlviii.  24  ;  Amos  ii.  2.— Ver.  20.  From  Bamoth  they 
proceeded  "  to  the  valley ,  ivJiich  (is)  in  the  field  of  Moah,  upon  the 
top  of  Pisgah,  and  looks  across  the  face  of  the  desert."  "^^p^n  ^Hl^ 
head,  or  height  of  the  Fisgah,  is  in  apposition  to  the  field  of  Moab. 
The  'Afield  of  Moab''  was  a  portion  of  the  table-land  which  stretches 
from  Eabbath  Amman  to  the  Arnon,  which  "  is  perfectly  treeless 
for  an  immense  distance  in  one  part  (viz.  the  neighbourhood  of 
Eleale),  but  covered  over  with  the  ruins  of  towns  that  have  been 
destroyed,"  and  which  "  extends  to  the  desert  of  Arabia  towards 
the  east,  and  slopes  off  to  the  Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea  towards 
the  west"  (v.  Baumer,  Pal.  p.  71).  It  is  identical  with  "the  whole 
plain  from  Medeha  to  Dibon"  (Josh.  xiii.  9),  and  "  the  whole  plain 
by  Medeha''  (ver.  16),  in  which  Heshbon  and  its  cities  were  situated 
(ver.  17  ;  cf.  ver.  21  and  Deut.  iii.  10).  The  valley  in  this  table- 
land was  upon  the  height  of  Fisgah,  i.e.  the  northern  part  of  the 
mountains  of  Abarim,  and  looked  across  the  surface  of  the  desert. 
Jeshimon,  the  desert,  is  the  plain  of  Ghor  el  Belka,  i.e.  the  valley 
-of  desolation  on  the  north-eastern  border  of  the  Dead  Sea,  which 
stretches  from  the  Wady  Menshalla  or  Wady  Ghuweir  (el  Guer) 
to  the  small  brook  el  SzuSme  (Wady  es  Suweimeh  on  Van  de  Velde's 
map)  at  the  Dead  Sea,  and  narrows  it  more  and  more  at  the  north- 
ern extremity  on  this  side.  "  Ghor  el  Belka  consists  in  part  of  a 
barren,  salt,  and  stony  soil ;  though  there  are  some  portions  which 
can  be  cultivated.  To  the  north  of  the  brook  el  Szu^me,  the  great 
plain  of  the  Jordan  begins,  which  is  utterly  without  fertility  till 
you  reach  the  JVahr  ITesbdn,  about  two  hours  distant,  and  produces 
nothing  but  bitter,  salt  herbs  for  camels"  (Seetzen,  ii.  pp.  373,  374), 
and  which  was  probably  reckoned  as  part  of  Jeshimon,  since  Beth- 
Jeshimoth  was  situated  within  it  (see  at  chap,  xxiii.  28).  The 
valley  in  which  the  Israelites  were  encamped  in  the  field  of  Moab 
upon  the  top  of  Pisgah,  is  therefore  to  be  sought  for  to  the  west  of 
Heshbon,  on  the  mountain  range  of  Abarim,  which  slopes  off  into 
the  Ghor  el  Belka.  From  this  the  Israelites  advanced  into  the 
Arboth  Moab  (see  chap.  xxii.  1). 

If  we  compare  the  places  of  encampment  named  in  vers.  11-20 
with  the  list  of  stations  in  chap,  xxxiii.  41-49,  we  find,  instead  of  the 
seven  places  mentioned  here  between  Ijje  Abarim  and  the  Arboth 
Moab, — viz.  Brook  Zared,  on  the  other  side  of  the  Arnon  in  the 
desert,  Beer,  Mattana,  Nahaliel,  Bamoth,  and  the  valley  in  the  field  of 


CHAP.  XXI.  16-20.  '  149 

Moab  upon  the  top  of  Pisgah, — only  three  places  given,  viz.  Dihon 
of  Gad,  Almon  Diblathaim,  and  Mount  Aharim  before  Nebo.  That 
the  last  of  these  is  only  another  name  for  the  valley  in  the  field  of 
Moab  upon  the  top  of  Pisgah,  is  undoubtedly  proved  by  the  fact 
that,  according  to  Deut.  xxxiv.  1  (cf.  chap.  iii.  27),  Mount  Nebo 
was  a  peak  of  Pisgah,  and  that  it  was  situated,  according  to  Deut. 
xxxii.  49,  upon  the  mountains  of  Aharim,  from  which  it  is  evident 
at  once  that  the  Pisgah  was  a  portion  of  the  mountains  of  Abainm, 
and  in  fact  the  northern  portion  opposite  to  Jericho  (see  at  chap, 
xxvii.  12).  The  two  other  differences  in  the  names  may  be  ex- 
plained from  the  circumstance  that  the  space  occupied  by  the  en- 
campment of  the  Israelites,  an  army  of  600,000  men,  with  their 
wives,  children,  and  cattle,  when  once  they  reached  the  inhabited 
country  with  its  towns  and  villages,  where  every  spot  had  its  own 
fixed  name,  must  have  extended  over  several  places,  so  that  the 
very  same  encampment  might  be  called  by  one  or  other  of  the 
places  upon  which  it  touched.  If  Dibon  Gad  (chap,  xxxiii.  45) 
was  the  Dibon  built  (i.e.  rebuilt  or  fortified)  by  the  Gadites  after 
the  conquest  of  the  land  (chap,  xxxii.  3,  34),  and  allotted  to  the 
Eeubenites  (Josh.  xiii.  9,  17),  which  is  still  traceable  in  the  ruins 
of  Dibdn,  an  hour  to  the  north  of  the  Arnon  (y,  Baumer,  Pal.  p. 
261),  (and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  it),  then  the  place  of  en- 
campment, Nahaliel  (Encheile),  was  identical  with  Dibon  of  Gad, 
and  was  placed  after  this  town  in  chap,  xxxiii.  45,  because  the 
camp  of  the  Israelites  extended  as  far  as  Dibon  along  the  northern 
bank  of  that  river.  Almon  Diblathaim  also  stands  in  the  same 
relation  to  Bamoth.  The  two  places  do  not  appear  to  have  been 
far  from  one  another ;  for  Almon  Diblathaim  is  probably  iden- 
tical with  Beth  Diblathaim,  which  is  mentioned  in  Jer.  xlviii.  22 
along  with  Dibon,  Nebo,  and  other  Moabite  towns,  and  is  to  be 
sought  for  to  the  north  or  north-west  of  Dibon.  For,  according 
to  Jerome  {Onom.  s.  v.  Jassa),  Jahza  was  between  Medaba  and 
Deblatai,  for  which  JEusebius  has  written  Arj^ov^  by  mistake  for 
Ac^(ov;  Eusebius  having  determined  the  relative  position  of  Jahza 
according  to  a  more  southerly  place,  Jerome  according  to  one 
farther  north.  The  camp  of  the  Israelites  therefore  may  easily 
have  extended  from  Almon  or  Beth-Diblathaim  to  Bamoth,  and 
might  very  well  take  its  name  from  either  place.^ . 

'  Neither  this  difference  in  the  names  of  the  places  of  encampment,  nor  the 
material  diversity, — viz.  that  in  the  chapter  before  us  there  are  four  places  more 
introduced  than  in  chap,  xxxiii.,  whereas  in  every  other  case  the  list  in  chap. 


150 


THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


Vers.  21-35.  Defeat  of  the  Amorite  Kings,  Sthon  of 
Heshbon  and  Og  of  Bashan,  and  Conquest  of  their 
Kingdoms. — Vers.  21-23.  When  the  Israelites  reached  the  eastern 
border  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Amorite  king  Silion  (see  at  ver.  13), 
they  sent  messengers  to  him,  as  they  had  previously  done  to  the 
king  of  Edom,  to  ask  permission  to  pass  peaceably  through  his 
territory  upon  the  high  road  (cf.  ver.  22  and  chap.  xx.  17) ;  and 
Sihon  refused  this  request,  just  as  the  king  of  Edom  had  done,  and 
marched  with  all  his  people  against  the  Israehtes.  But  whereas 
the  Lord  forbade  the  Israelites  to  make  war  upon  their  kinsmen 
the  Edomites,  He  now  commanded  them  to  make  war  upon  the 
Amorite  king,  and  take  possession  of  his  land  (Deut.  ii.  24,  25)  ; 
for  the  Amorites  belonged  to  the  Canaanitish  tribes  which  were 
ripe  for  the  judgment  of  extermination  (Gen.  xv.  16).  And  if, 
notwithstanding  this,  the  Israelites  sent  to  him  with  words  of  peace 
(Deut.  ii.  26),  this  was  simply  done  to  leave  the  decision  of  his  fate 
in  his  own  hand  (see  at  Deut.  ii.  24).  Sihon  came  out  against  the 
Israelites  into  the  desert  as  far  as  Jahza^  where  a  battle  was  fought, 
in  which  he  was  defeated.  The  accounts  of  the  Onom.  concerning 
Jahza,  which  was  situated,  according  to  Eusehius,  between  Medamon 
(Medaha)  and  Dehous  {Dibon,  see  above),  and  according  to  Jerome, 
between  Medaha  and  Deblatai,  may  be  reconciled  with  the  state- 
ment that  it  was  in  the  desert,  provided  we  assume  that  it  was  not 
in  a  straight  line  between  the  places  named,  but  in  a  more  easterly 
direction  on  the  edge  of  the  desert,  near  to  the  commencement  of 
the  Wady  Wale,  a  conclusion  to  which  the  juxtaposition  of  Jahza 

xxxiii.  contains  a  larger  number  of  stations  than  we  read  of  in  the  historical 
account, — at  all  warrants  the  hypothesis,  that  the  present  chapter  is  founded  upon 
a  different  document  from  chap,  xxxiii.  For  they  may  be  explained  in  a  very 
simple  manner,  as  Kurtz  has  most  conclusively  demonstrated  (vol.  iii.  pp.  383-5), 
from  the  diversity  in  the  character  of  the  two  chapters.  Chap,  xxxiii.  is  purely 
statistical.  The  catalogue  given  there  "  contains  a  complete  list  in  regular  order 
of  all  the  stations  properly  so  called,  that  is  to  say,  of  those  places  of  encamp- 
ment where  Israel  made  a  longer  stay  than  at  other  times,  and  therefore  not 
only  constructed  an  organized  camp,  but  also  set  up  the  tabernacle."  In  the 
historical  account,  on  the  other  hand,  the  places  mentioned  are  simply  those 
which  were  of  historical  importance.  For  this  reason  there  are  fewer  stations 
introduced  between  Mount  Hor  and  Ijje  Abarim  than  in  chap,  xxxiii.,  stations 
where  nothing  of  importance  occurred  being  passed  over ;  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  there  are  a  larger  number  mentioned  between  Ijje  Abarim  and  Arboth 
Moab,  and  some  of  them  places  where  no  complete  camp  was  constructed  witli 
the  tabernacle  set  up,  probably  because  they  were  memorable  as  starting-points 
for  the  expeditions  into  the  two  Amorite  kingdoms. 


I 


i 


CHAP.  XXL  21-35.  151 

and  MepJiaot  in  Josh.  xiii.  18,  xxi.  37,  and  Jer.  xlviii.  21,  also 
points  (see  at  Josh.  xiii.  18). — Yer.  24.  Israel  smote  him  with  the 
edge  of  the  sword,  i.e.  without  quarter  (see  Gen.  xxxiv.  26),  and 
took  possession  of  his  land  ''from  Arnon  (Mojeb)  to  the  Jabholc, 
unto  the  children  of  A  mmon,^^  i.e.  to  the  upper  J  abbok,  the  modern 
Nahr  or  Moiet  Amman.  The  Jahhok,  now  called  Zerka,  i.e.  the 
blue,  does  not  take  its  rise,  as  Seetzen  supposed,  on  the  pilgrim-road 
by  the  castle  of  Zerka ;  but  its  source,  according  to  Ahulfeda  {tab. 
Syr.  p.  91)  and  Buckingham^  is  the  Nahr  Amman,  which  flowed 
down  from  the  ancient  capital  of  the  Ammonites,  and  was  called 
the  upper  Jahhok,  and  formed  the  western  border  of  the  Ammonites 
towards  the  kingdom  of  Sihon,  and  subsequently  towards  Gad 
(Deut.  ii.  37,  iii.  16 ;  Josh.  xii.  2).  "  For  the  border  of  the  Ammon- 
ites was  strong "  (firm),  i.e.  strongly  fortified ;  "  for  which  reason 
Sihon  had  only  been  able  to  push  his  conquests  to  the  upper  Jab- 
bok,  not  into  the  territory  of  the  Ammonites."  This  explanation  of 
KnobeVs  is  perfectly  correct ;  since  the  reason  why  the  Israelites 
did  not  press  forward  into  the  country  of  the  Ammonites,  was  not 
the  strength  of  their  frontier,  but  the  word  of  the  Lord,  "  Make  not 
war  upon  them,  for  I  shall  give  thee  no  possession  of  the  land  of 
the  children  of  Ammon  "  (Deut.  ii.  19).  God  had  only  promised 
the  patriarchs,  on  behalf  of  their  posterity,  that  He  would  give 
them  the  land  of  Canaan,  which  was  bounded  towards  the  east  by 
the  Jordan  (chap,  xxxiv.  2-12  ;  compared  with  Gen.  x.  19  and  xv. 
19-21)  ;  and  the  Israelites  would  have  received  no  settlement  at  all  on 
the  eastern  side  of  the  Jordan,  had  not  the  Canaanitish  branch  of 
the  Amorites  extended  itself  to  that  side  in  the  time  of  Moses,  and 
conquered  a  large  portion  of  the  possessions  of  the  Moabites,  and 
also  (according  to  Josh.  xiii.  25,  as  compared  with  Judg.  xi.  13)  of 
the  Ammonites,  driving  back  the  Moabites  as  far  as  the  Arnon, 
and  the  Ammonites  behind  the  Nahr  Amman.  With  the  defeat  of 
the  Amorites,  all  the  land  that  they  had  conquered  passed  into 
the  possession  of  the  Israelites,  who  took  possession  of  these  towns 
(cf.  Deut.  ii.  34-36).  The  statement  in  ver.  25,  that  Israel  settled 
in  all  the  towns  of  the  Amorites,  is  somewhat  anticipatory  of  the 
history  itself,  as  the  settlement  did  not  occur  till  Moses  gave  the 
conquered  land  to  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad  for  a  possession 
(chap,  xxxii.).  The  only  places  mentioned  here  are  Heshbon  and 
her  daughters,  i.e.  the  smaller  towns  belonging  to  it  (cf .  Josh.  xiii. 
17),  which  are  enumerated  singly  in  chap,  xxxii.  34-38,  and  Josh, 
xiii.  15-28.     In  explanation  of  the  expression,  "  Heshbon  and  her 


152  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

daugliters,"  it  is  added  in  ver.  26,  that  Heslibon  was  the  city,  Le, 
the  ca^Dital  of  the  Amorite  king  SIhon,  who  had  made  war  upon 
the  former  king  of  Moab,  and  taken  away  all  his  land  as  far  as  the 
iVrnon.  Consequently,  even  down  to  the  time  of  the  predecessor 
of  Balak,  the  king  of  the  Moabites  at  that  time,  the  land  to  the 
north  of  the  Arnon,  and  probably  even  as  far  as  the  lower  Jabbok, 
to  which  point  the  kingdom  of  Sihon  extended  (see  Deut.  iii.  12, 
13 ;  Josh.  xii.  5),  belonged  to  the  Moabites.  And  in  accordance 
with  this,  the  country  where  the  Israelites  encamped  opposite  to 
Jericho,  before  crossing  the  Jordan,  is  reckoned  as  part  of  the  land 
of  Moab  (Deut.  i.  5,  xxviii.  69,  xxxii.  49,  xxxiv.  5,  6),  and  called 
Arboth  Moab  (see  chap.  xxii.  1)  ;  whilst  the  women  who  seduced 
the  Israelites  to  join  in  the  idolatrous  worship  of  Baal  Peor  are 
called  daughters  of  Moab  (chap.  xxv.  1). 

Yers.  27-30.  The  glorious  conquest  and  destruction  of  the 
capital  of  the  powerful  king  of  the  Amorites,  in  the  might  of  the 
Lord  their  God,  inspired  certain  composers  of  proverbs  (DwD 
denom.  from  ^^^)  to  write  songs  in  commemoration  of  the  victory. 
Three  strophes  are  given  from  a  song  of  this  kind,  and  introduced 
with  the  words  "  therefore,'^  sc.  because  Heshbon  had  fallen  in  this 
manner,  "  the  composers  of  proverbs  say,^'  The  first  strophe  (vers. 
275  and  28)  runs  thus :  "  Come  to  Heshbon :  Built  and  restored 
be  the  city  of  Sihon  I  For  fire  went  out  of  Heshbon  ;  flames  from 
the  city  of  Sihon.  It  devoured  Ar  Moab,  the  lords  of  the  heights 
of  ArnonV  The  summons  to  come  to  Heshbon  and  build  this 
ruined  city  up  again,  was  not  addressed  to  the  Israelites,  but  to 
the  conquered  Amorites,  and  is  to  be  interpreted  as  ironical  {F.  v. 
Meyer;  Eioald,  Gesch.  ii.  pp.  267,  268):  ''Come  to  Heshbon,  ye 
victorious  Amorites,  and  build  your  royal  city  up  again,  which 
we  have  laid  in  ruins  I  A  fire  has  gone  out  of  it,  and  burned  up 
Ar  Moab,  and  the  lords  of  the  heights  of  the  ArnonP  The  refer- 
ence is  to  the  w^ar-fire,  which  the  victorious  Amorites  kindled 
from  Heshbon  in  the  land  of  Moab  under  the  former  kino-  of 
Moab  ;  that  is  to  say,  the  war  in  which  they  subjugated  Ar  Moab 
and  the  possessors  of  the  heights  of  Arnon.  Ar  Moab  (see  at 
ver.  15)  appears  to  have  been  formerly  the  capital  of  all  Moabitis, 
or  at  least  of  that  portion  of  it  which  was  situated  upon  the  north- 
ern side  of  the  Arnon ;  and  the  prominence  given  to  it  in  Deut. 
ii.  9,  18,  29,  is  in  harmony  with  this.  The  heights  of  Arnon  are 
mentioned  as  the  limits  to  which  Sihon  had  carried  his  victorious 
supremacy  over  Moab.   The  "  lords''  of  these  heights  are  the  Moab- 


CHAP.  XXL  21-35.  153 

ites. — Ver.  29.  Second  strophe :  "  Woe  to  thee,  Moah  !  Thou  art 
lost,  loeople  of  Chemosh  !  He  has  given  up  his  sons  as  fugitives,  and 
his  daughters  into  captivity/ — to  Sihon,  Icing  of  the  Amoiites"  The 
poet  here  turns  to  Moab,  and  announces  its  overthrow.  Chemosh 
(t^D3,  from  ^^^  =  ^y^,  subactor,  domitor)  was  the  leading  deity  of 
the  Moabites  (Jer.  xlviii.  7)  as  well  as  of  the  Ammonites  (Judg.  xi. 
24),  and  related  not  only  to  Milcom,  a  god  of  the  Ammonites,  but 
also  to  the  early  Canaanitish  deity  Baal  and  Moloch.  According 
to  a  statement  of  Jerome  (on  Isa.  xv.),  it  was  only  another  name 
for  Baal  Peor,  probably  a  god  of  the  sun,  which  was  worshipped  as 
the  king  of  his  nation  and  the  god  of  war.  He  is  found  in  this 
character  upon  the  coins  of  Areopolis,  standing  upon  a  column, 
with  a  sword  in  his  right  hand  and  a  lance  and  shield  in  the  left, 
and  with  two  fire-torches  by  his  side  (cf.  Ehhel  doctr.  numm,  vet. 
iii.  p.  504),  and  was  appeased  by  the  sacrifice  of  children  in  times 
of  great  distress  (2  Kings  iii.  27).  Further  information,  and  to 
some  extent  a  different  view,  are  found  in  the  article  by  J.  G. 
Mailer  in  Herzog's  Cyclopaedia.  The  subject  to  \T\\  is  neither  Moab 
nor  Jehovah,  but  Chemosh.  The  thought  is  this:  as  Chemosh, 
the  god  of  Moab,  could  not  deliver  his  people  from  the  Amorite 
king ;  so  now  that  Israel  has  conquered  the  latter,  Moab  is  utterly 
lost.  In  the  triumph  which  Israel  celebrated  over  Moab  through 
conquering  its  conquerors,  there  is  a  forewarning  expressed  of  the 
ultimate  subjection  of  Moab  under  the  sceptre  of  Israel. — Ver.  30. 
Third  strophe,  in  which  the  woe  evoked  upon  Moab  is  justified : 
"  We  cast  them  down :  Heshhon  is  lost  even  to  Dihon  ;  and  we  laid 
it  waste  even  to  Nophah,  with  fire  to  Medeba.^'  D^^31  is  the  first  pars, 
pi.  imperf.  Kal  of  nnj  with  the  suffix  D—  for  D—  (as  in  Ex.  xxix.  30). 
n^J,  to  cast  arrows,  to  shoot  down  (Ex.  xix.  13)  :  figuratively  to 
throw  to  the  ground  (Ex.  xv.  4).  D''K^J  for  DK':?,  first  pers.  pi.  imperf. 
Hiph.  of  HK'J,  synonymous  with  nvj,  Jer.  iv.  7.  The  suffixes  of  both 
verbs  refer  to  the  Moabites  as  the  inhabitants  of  the  cities  named. 
Accordingly  Heshbon  also  is  construed  as  a  masculine,  because  it 
was  not  the  town  as  such,  but  the  inhabitants,  that  were  referred  to. 
Heshbon,  the  residence  of  king  Sihon,  stood  pretty  nearly  in  the 
centre  between  the  Arnon  and  the  Jabbok  (according  to  the  Onom. 
twenty  Eoman  miles  from  the  Jordan,  opposite  to  Jericho),  and 
still  exists  in  extensive  ruins  with  deep  bricked  wells,  under  the  old 
name  of  Hesbdn  (cf.  v.  Raumer,  Pal.  p.  262).  On  Dibon  in  the 
south,  not  more  than  an  hour  from  Arnon,  see  p.  288.  Nophach  is 
probably  the  same  as  Nobach,  Judg.  viii.  11,  but  not  the  same  as 


154  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

KenatJi,  which  was  altered  into  Nohach  (chap,  xxxii.  42).  Accord- 
ing to  Judg.  viii.  11,  it  was  near  Jogbeha,  not  far  from  the  eastern 
desert ;  and  in  all  probability  it  still  exists  in  the  ruined  place  called 
Nowakis  (Burckhardt,  p.  619  ;  Buchingham,  ii.  p.  46  ;  Bohinson, 
App.  p.  188),  to  the  north-west  of  Amman  {Rahhath- Amnion), 
Nophach,  therefore,  is  referred  to  as  a  north-eastern  town  or  for- 
tress, and  contrasted  with  Bibon,  which  was  in  the  south.  The 
words  which  follow,  '^  ^V  "i^fc^,  '^  which  to  3fedeba,"  yield  no  intel- 
ligible meaning.  The  Seventy  give  Trvp  eirl  M.  (fire  upon  Medeba), 
and  seem  to  have  adopted  the  reading  "^V  ^^,  In  the  Masoretic 
punctuation  also,  the  t  in  ID'i?  is  marked  as  suspicious  by  a  puncL 
extraord.  Apparently,  therefore,  "it^i^  was  a  copyist's  error  of  old 
standing  for  ^^^  and  is  to  be  construed  as  governed  by  the  verb 
U^m^  "  with  fire  to  MedehaV  This  city  was  about  two  hours  to  the 
south-east  of  Heshbon,  and  is  still  to  be  seen  in  ruins  bearinsr  the 
name  of  Medaha,  upon  the  top  of  a  hill  of  about  half-an-hour's 
journey  in  circumference  {Burckhardt,  p.  Q2b  ',  v.  Baumer,  Pal. 
pp.  264-5).' 

Vers.  31,  32.  When  Israel  was  sitting,  i.e.  encamped,  in  the  land 
of  the  Amorites,  Moses  reconnoitred  Jaezer,  after  which  the  Israel- 
ites took  "its  daughters,"  i.e.  the  smaller  places  dependent  upon 
Jaezer,  and  destroyed  the  Amorites  who  dwelt  in  them.  It  is 
evident  from  chap,  xxxii.  35,  that  Jaezer  was  not  only  conquered, 
but  destroyed.  This  city,  which  was  situated,  according  to  the 
Onom.  (s.  V.  Jazer),  ten  Roman  miles  to  the  west  of  Bhiladelphia 
(Babbath'Ammon),  and  fifteen  Roman  miles  to  the  north  of  Hesh- 
bon, is  most  probably  to  be  sought  for  (as  Seetzen  supposes,  i.  pp. 
397,  406,  iv.  p.  216)  in  the  ruins  of  es  Szir,  at  the  source  of  the 
Nahr  Szir,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  which  Seetzen  found  some  pools, 
which  are  probably  the  remains  of  "  the  sea  of  Jazer,"  mentioned 
in  Jer.  xlviii.  32.  There  is  less  probability  in  Burckhardis  con- 
jecture (p.  609),  that  it  is  to  be  found  in  the  ruins  of  Ain  Hazivj 

^  Ewald  and  BleeTc  (Einleitung  in  d.  A.  T.  p.  200)  are  both  agreed  that  this 
ode  was  composed  on  the  occasion  of  the  defeat  of  the  Amorites  by  the  Israel- 
ites, and  particularly  on  the  capture  of  the  capital  Heshbon,  as  it  depicts  the 
fall  of  Heshbon  in  the  most  striking  way ;  and  this  city  was  rebuilt  shortly 
afterwards  by  the  Reubenites,  and  remained  ever  afterwards  a  city  of  some 
importance.  Kjiobel,  on  the  other  hand,  has  completely  misunderstood  the 
meaning  and  substance  of  the  verses  quoted,  and  follows  some  of  the  earliest 
commentators,  such  as  Clericus  and  others,  in  regarding  the  ode  as  an  Amoritish 
production,  and  inrerpreting  it  as  relating  to  the  conquest  and  fortification  of 
Heshbon  by  Sihon. 


CHAP.  XXI.  2 1-3 J.  155 

near  KJierhet  el  Suh,  to  the  south-west  of  es  Salt ;  though  v.  Raumer 
(Pal.  p.  262)  decides  in  its  favour  (see  my  Commentary  on  Josh, 
xiii.  25). — Vers.  33-35.  The  Israehtes  then  turned  towards  the 
north,  and  took  the  road  to  Bashan,  where  king  Og  came  against 
them  with  his  people,  to  battle  at  EdreL  From  what  point  it  was 
that  the  Israelites  entered  upon  the  expedition  against  Bashan,  is 
not  stated  either  here  or  in  Deut.  iii.  1  sqq.,  where  Moses  recapitu- 
lates these  events,  and  gives  a  more  detailed  account  of  the  con- 
quests than  he  does  here,  simply  because  it  was  of  no  importance 
in  relation  to  the  main  object  of  the  history.  We  have  probably  to 
picture  the  conquest  of  the  kingdoms  of  Sihon  and  Og  as  taking 
place  in  the  following  manner  :  namely,  that  after  Sihon  had  been 
defeated  at  Jahza,  and  his  capital  had  been  speedily  taken  in 
consequence  of  this  victory,  Moses  sent  detachments  of  his  army 
from  the  places  of  encampment  mentioned  in  vers.  16,  18-20,  into 
the  different  divisions  of  his  kingdom,  for  the  purpose  of  taking 
possession  of  their  towns.  After  the  conquest  of  the  whole  of  the 
territory  of  Sihon,  the  main  army  advanced  to  Bashan  and  defeated 
king  Og  in  a  great  battle  at  Edrei,  whereupon  certain  detachments 
of  the  army  were  again  despatched,  under  courageous  generals,  to 
secure  the  conquest  of  the  different  parts  of  his  kingdom  (cf.  chap, 
xxxii.  39,  41,  42).  The  kingdom  of  Og  embraced  the  northern 
half  of  Gilead,  i.e.  the  country  between  the  Jabbok  and  the  Mand- 
hur  (Deut.  iii.  13  ;  Josh.  xii.  5),  the  modern  Jebel  Ajlwi,  and  "  all 
Bashan,"  or  "all  the  region  of  Argoh^^  (Deut.  iii.  4,  13,  14),  the 
modern  plain  of  Jaulan  and  Hauran,  which  extended  eastwards  to 
Sakha,  north-eastwards  to  Edrei  (Deut.  iii.  10),  and  northwards  to 
Geshur  and  Maacha  (Josh.  xii.  5).  For  further  remarks,  see  Deut. 
iii.  10.  There  were  two  towns  in  Bashan  of  the  name  of  Edrei, 
One  of  them,  which  is  mentioned  in  Deut.  i.  4  and  Josh.  xii.  4, 
along  with  Ashtaroth,  as  a  second  residence  of  king  Og,  is  described 
in  the  Onom.  (s.  v.  Ashtaroth  and  Edrei)  as  six  Roman  miles,  i.e. 
fully  two  hours,  from  Ashtaroth,  and  twenty-four  or  twenty-five 
miles  from  Bostra,  and  called  Adraa  or  Adara.  This  is  the  modern 
Dera  or  Draa  (in  Burckhardt,  p.  385 ;  Seetzen,  i.  pp.  363,  364),  and 
Draahy  Idderat  (in  Buckingham,  Syr,  ii.  p.  146),  a  place  which  still 
exists,  consisting  of  a  number  of  miserable  houses,  built  for  the  most 
part  of  basalt,  and  standing  upon  a  small  elevation  in  a  treeless, 
hilly  region,  with  the  ruins  of  an  old  church  and  other  smaller 
buildings,  supposed  to  belong  to  the  time  when  Draa,  Adraa  (as 
urhs  Arahiae),  was  an  episcopal  see,  on  the  east  of  the  pilgrim-road 


156  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

between  Remtha  and  Mezareib,  by  the  side  of  a  small  wady  (see 
Bitter,  JErdk  xv.  pp.  838  sqq.).  The  other  Edrei,  which  is  men- 
tioned in  Deut.  iii.  10  as  the  north-western  frontier  of  Bashan,  was 
farther  towards  the  north,  and  is  still  to  be  seen  in  the  ruins  of 
Zorah  or  Ethra  (see  at  Deut.  iii.  10).  In  the  present  instance  the 
southern  town  is  intended,  which  was  not  far  from  the  south-west 
frontier  of  Bashan,  as  Og  certainly  did  not  allow  the  Israelites  to 
advance  to  the  northern  frontier  of  his  kingdom  before  he  gave  them 
battle. — Vers.  34,  35.  Just  as  in  the  case  of  Sihon,  the  Lord  had  also 
promised  the  Israelites  a  victory  over  Og,  and  had  given  him  into 
their  power,  so  that  they  smote  him,  with  his  sons  and  all  his  people, 
without  leaving  any  remnant,  and  executed  the  ban,  according  to 
Deut.  ii.  34,  upon  both  the  kings.     (See  the  notes  on  Deut.  iii.) 


TIL— OCCURRENCES  IN  THE  STEPPES  OF  MOAB,  WITH  INSTRUC- 
TIONS RELATING  TO  THE  CONQUEST  AND  DISTRIBUTION 
OF  THE  LAND  OF  CANAAN. 

Chap,  xxii.-xxxvi. 

Chap.  xxii.  1.  After  the  defeat  of  the  two  Amorite  kings,  Sihon 
and  Og,  and  the  conquest  of  their  kingdoms  in  Gilead  and  Bashan, 
the  Israelites  removed  from  the  height  of  Pisgah,  on  the  mountains 
of  Abarim  before  Nebo  (see  at  chap.  xxi.  20),  and  encamped  in  the 
'^  Arhoth  Moab  (the  steppes  of  Moab),  on  the  other  side  of  the 
Jordan  of  Jericho,"  i.e.  that  part  of  the  Jordan  w^hich  skirted  the 
province  of  Jericho.  Arhotli  Moab  was  the  name  given  to  that 
portion  of  the  Arabah,  or  large  plain  of  the  Jordan,  the  present 
Ghor  (see  at  Deut.  i.  1),  which  belonged  to  the  territory  of  the 
Moabites  previous  to  the  spread  of  the  Amorites  under  Sihon  in 
the  land  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  and  which  probably  reached 
from  the  Dead  Sea  to  the  mouth  of  the  Jabbok.  The  site  of  the 
Israelitish  camp  is  therefore  defined  with  greater  minuteness  by  the 
clause  "  beyond  the  Jordan  of  Jericho."  This  place  of  encamp- 
ment, which  is  frequently  alluded  to  (chap.  xxvi.  3,  63,  xxxi.  12, 
xxxiii.  48,  50,  xxxv.  1,  xxxvi.  13 ;  Josh.  xiii.  32),  extended,  according 
to  chap,  xxxiii.  49,  from  Beih-Jeshimoth  to  Ahel-Shittim.  Beth- 
Jeshimoth  (i.e.  house  of  wastes),  on  the  north-eastern  desert  border 
(Jeshimon,  chap.  xxi.  20)  of  the  Dead  Sea,  a  town  allotted  to  the 
tribe  of  Keuben  (Josh.  xii.  3,  xiii.  20),  was  situated,  according  to 


CHAP.  XXII.  2-XXIV.  25.  157 

the  Onom,  (s.  v,  BrjOaaifjiovOj  BetJisimuth),  ten  Koman  miles,  or  four 
hours,  to  the  south  (S.E.)  of  Jericho,  on  the  Dead  Sea ;  according 
to  Josephus  (bell.  jud.  iv.  7,  6),  it  was  to  the  south  of  Julias  (Livias), 
i.e.  Beth-Haraniy  or  Rameh,  on  the  northern  edge  of  the  Wady 
Hesban  (see  at  chap,  xxxii.  36),  or  in  the  Ghor  el  Seisabdn,  on  the 
northern  coast  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  the  southern  end  of  the  plain 
of  the  Jordan.  Abel  Shittim  (D^tSE^n  pax),  i.e.  the  acacia-meadow, 
or,  in  its  briefer  form,  Shittim  (chap.  xxv.  1),  was  situated,  according 
to  Josephus  (Ant.  iv.  8,  1),  on  the  same  spot  as  the  later  town  of 
Abila,  in  a  locality  rich  in  date-palms,  sixty  stadia  from  the  Jordan, 
probably  by  the  Wady  Eshtah  to  the  north  of  the  Wady  Hesban  ; 
even  if  Knobe^s  supposition  that  the  name  is  connected  with  n^K'K 
=  ntSK^  with  i?  prost.  should  not  be  a  tenable  one.  From  Shittim  or 
Sittim  the  Israelites  advanced,  under  Joshua,  to  the  Jordan,  to 
effect  the  conquest  of  Canaan  (Josh.  iii.  1). 

In  the  steppes  of  Moab  the  Israelites  encamped  upon  the  border 
of  the  promised  land,  from  which  they  were  only  separated  by  the 
Jordan.  But  before  this  boundary  line  could  be  passed,  there  were 
many  preparations  that  had  to  be  made.  In  the  first  place,  the 
whole  congregation  was  to  pass  through  a  trial  of  great  importance 
to  all  future  generations,  as  bearing  upon  the  relation  in  which  it 
stood  to  the  heathen  world ;  and  in  the  second  place,  it  was  here 
that  Moses,  who  was  not  to  enter  Canaan  because  of  his  sin  at  the 
water  of  strife,  was  to  bring  the  work  of  legislation  to  a  close  before 
his  death,  and  not  only  to  issue  the  requisite  instructions  concerning 
the  conquest  of  the  promised  inheritance,  and  the  division  of  it 
among  the  tribes  of  Israel,  but  to  impress  once  more  upon  the 
hearts  of  the  whole  congregation  the  essential  contents  of  the  whole 
law,  with  all  that  the  Lord  had  done  for  Israel,  that  they  might  be 
confirmed  in  their  fidelity  to  the  Lord,  and  preserved  from  the 
danger  of  apostasy.  This  last  work  of  the  faithful  servant  of  God, 
with  which  he  brought  his  mediatorial  work  to  a  close,  is  described 
in  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  ;  whilst  the  laws  relating  to  the  con- 
quest and  partition  of  Canaan,  with  the  experience  of  Israel  in  the 
steppes  of  Moab,  fill  up  the  latter  portion  of  the  present  book. 


BALAAM  AND  HIS  PROPHECIES. — CHAP.  XXII.  2-XXIV.  25. 

The  rapid  defeat  of  the  two  mighty  kings  of  the  Amorites 
filled  the  Moabites  with  such  alarm  at  the  iiTesistible  might  of  Israel, 
that  Balak  their  king,  with  the  princes  of  Midian,  sought  to  bring 


158  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  powers  of  heathen  magic  to  bear  against  the  nation  of  God ; 
and  to  this  end  he  sent  messengers  with  presents  to  Balaam,  the 
celebrated  soothsayer,  in  Mesopotamia,  who  had  the  reputation  of 
being  able  both  to  bless  and  curse  with  great  success,  to  entreat  him 
to  come,  and  so  to  weaken  the  Israelites  w^ith  his  magical  curses, 
that  he  might  be  able  to  smite  them,  and  drive  them  out  of  his  land 
(chap.  xxii.  1-7).  At  first  Balaam  declined  this  invitation,  in  con- 
sequence of  divine  instructions  (vers.  8-14)  ;  but  when  a  second 
and  still  more  imposing  embassy  of  Moabite  princes  appeared  be- 
fore him,  God  gave  him  permission  to  go  with  them,  but  on  this 
condition,  that  he  should  do  nothing  but  what  Jehovah  should  tell 
him  (vers.  15-21).  When  on  the  way,  he  was  warned  again  by 
the  miraculous  opposition  of  the  angel  of  the  Lord,  to  say  nothing 
but  what  God  should  say  to  him  (vers.  22-35).  AVhen  Balak,  there- 
fore, came  to  meet  him,  on  his  arrival  at  the  border  of  his  kingdom, 
to  give  him  a  grand  reception,  Balaam  explained  to  him,  that  he 
could  only  speak  the  word  which  Jehovah  would  put  into  his  mouth 
(vers.  36-40),  and  then  proclaimed,  in  four  different  utterances, 
what  God  inspired  him  to  declare.  First  of  all,  as  he  stood  upon 
the  height  of  Bamoth-Baal,  from  which  he  could  see  the  end  of  the 
Israelitish  camp,  he  declared  that  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  curse 
this  matchless,  numerous,  and  righteous  people,  because  they  had 
not  been  cursed  by  their  God  (chap.  xxii.  41— xxiii.  10).  He  then 
went  to  the  head  of  Pisgah,  where  he  could  see  all  Israel,  and  an- 
nounced that  Jehovah  would  bless  this  people,  because  He  saw  no 
unrighteousness  in  them,  and  that  He  would  dwell  among  them  as 
their  King,  making  known  His  word  to  them,  and  endowing  them 
with  activity  and  lion-like  power  (chap,  xxiii.  11—24).  And  lastly, 
upon  the  top  of  Peor,  where  he  could  see  Israel  encamped  according 
to  its  tribes,  he  predicted,  in  two  more  utterances,  the  spread  and 
powerful  development  of  Israel  in  its  inheritance,  under  the  blessing 
of  God  (chap,  xxiii.  25-xxiv.  9),  the  rise  of  a  star  out  of  Jacob  in 
the  far  distant  future,  and  the  appearance  of  a  ruler  in  Israel,  who 
would  break  to  pieces  all  its  foes  (chap.  xxiv.  10—24)  ;  and  upon 
this  Balak  sent  him  away  (ver.  25). 

From  the  very  earliest  times  opinions  have  been  divided  as  to 
the  character  of  Balaam.^     Some  {e.g,  Philo,  Ambrose,  and  Augus- 

^  On  Balaam  and  his  prophecies  see  G.  Moebius  Prophets  Bileami  historian 
Lips.  1676  ;  Liiderwald^  die  Geschichte  Bileams  deutlich  u.  befjreijlich  erkldrt 
(Helmst.  1787)  ;  B.  K.  de  Geei\  Diss,  de  Bileamo,  ejus  Jiistoria  et  vaticiniis ; 
TholucJcs  vermischte  Schri/ten   (i.   pp.  406  sqq.)  ;   Hengstenberg^   History  of 


CHAP.  XXII.  2-XXIV.  25.  159 

tine)  have  regarded  him  as  a  wizard  and  false  prophet,  devoted  td 
the  worship  of  idols,  who  was  destitute  of  any  susceptibility  for  the 
true  religion,  and  was  compelled  by  God,  against  his  will,  to  give 
utterance  to  blessings  upon  Israel  instead  of  curses.  Others  (e.g, 
Tertullian  and  Jerome)  have  supposed  him  to  be  a  genuine  and  true 
prophet,  who  simply  fell  through  covetousness  and  ambition.  But 
these  views  are  both  of  them  untenable  in  this  exclusive  form. 
Witsius  {Miscell.  ss.  i.  lib.  i.  c.  16,  §  33  sqq.),  Hengstenherg  (Balaam 
and  his  Prophecies),  and  Kurtz  (History  of  the  Old  Covenant),  have 
all  of  them  clearly  demonstrated  this.  The  name  DVp?  (LXX. 
BaXadfjb)  is  not  to  be  derived,  as  Gesenius  suggests,  from  i'3  and  D^, 
non  populusy  not  a  people,  but  either  from  P3  and  DV  (dropping 
one  y),  devourer  of  the  people  {Svnonis  and  Hengstenherg),  or  more 
probably  from  V?3,  with  the  terminal  syllable  D— ,  devourer,  de- 
stroyer (Fiirst,  Dietrich),  which  would  lead  to  the  conclusion,  that 
"  he  bore  the  name  as  a  dreaded  wizard  and  conjurer ;  whether  he 
received  it  at  his  birth,  as  a  member  of  a  family  in  which  this 
occupation  was  hereditary,  and  then  afterwards  actually  became  in 
public  opinion  what  the  giving  of  the  name  expressed  as  an  ex- 
pectation and  desire ;  or  whether  the  name  was  given  to  him  at  a 
later  period,  according  to  Oriental  custom,  when  the  fact  indicated 
by  the  name  had  actually  made  its  appearance"  (Hengstenherg). 
In  its  true  meaning,  the  name  is  related  to  that  of  his  father,  Beor.^ 
"liys,  from  "IV3,  to  burn,  eat  off,  destroy :  so  called  on  account  of 
the  destructive  power  attributed  to  his  curses  {Hengstenherg),  It 
is  very  probable,  therefore,  that  Balaam  belonged  to  a  family  in 
which  the  mantic  character,  or  magical  art,  was  hereditary.  These 
names  at  once  warrant  the  conjecture  that  Balaam  was  a  heathen 
conjurer  or  soothsayer.  Moreover,  he  is  never  called  fc<^33,  a  prophet, 
or  nrhj  a  seer,  but  DDpHj  the  soothsayer  (Josh.  xiii.  22),  a  title  which 

Balaam,  etc.  (Berlin,  1842,  and  English  translation  by  Ryland  :  Clark,  1847)  ; 
Kurtz^  History  of  the  Old  Covenant  (English  translation :  Clark,  1859)  ;  and 
Gust.  Baur^  Gesch.  der  alttestl.  Weissagung,  Giessen,  1861,  where  the  literature 
is  given  more  fully  still. 

^  The  form  Bosor,  which  we  find  instead  of  Beor  in  2  Pet.  ii.  15,  appears 
to  have  arisen  from  a  peculiar  mode  of  pronouncing  the  guttui'al  j;  (see  Loescher 
de  causis  ling.  ehr.  p.  246)  ;  whereas  Vitringa  maintains  (in  his  ohss.  ss.  1.  iv. 
c.  9),  that  Peter  himself  invented  this  form,  "  that  by  this  sound  of  the  word 
he  might  play  upon  the  Hebrew  "iii^3,  which  signifies  flesh,  and  thus  dehcately 
hint  that  Balaam^  the  false  prophet,  deserved  to  be  called  the  son  of  Bosor, 
i.e.  1B^3,  or  flesh,  on  account  of  his  persuading  to  the  indulgence  of  carnal 
lusts." 


150  THE  fourth:  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

is  never  used  in  connection  with  the  true  prophets.  For  QDi?^  sooth- 
saying, is  forbidden  to  the  Israelites  in  Deut.  xviii.  10  sqq.,  as  an 
abomination  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah,  and  is  spoken  of  everywhere 
not  only  as  a  grievous  sin  (1  Sam.  xv.  23 ;  Ezek.  xiii.  23 ;  2  Kings 
xvii.  17),  but  as  the  mark  of  a  false  prophet  (Ezek.  xiii.  9,  xxii.  28, 
Jer.  xiv.  14,  and  even  in  Isa.  iii.  2,  where  DDp  forms  the  antithesis 
to  ^"'?3).  Again,  Balaam  resorts  to  auguries,  just  like  a  heathen 
soothsayer  (chap.  xxiv.  1,  compared  with  chap,  xxiii.  3,  5),  for  the 
purpose  of  obtaining  revelations ;  from  which  we  may  see  that  he 
was  accustomed  to  adopt  this  as  his  ordinary  mode  of  soothsaying.^ 
On  the  other  hand,  Balaam  was  not  without  a  certain  measure  of. 
the  true  knowledge  of  God,  and  not  without  susceptibility  for  such 
revelations  of  the  true  God  as  he  actually  received ;  so  that,  without 
being  really  a  prophet,  he  was  able  to  give  utterance  to  true  pro- 
phecies from  Jehovah.  He  not  only  knew  Jehovah,  but  he  con- 
fessed Jehovah,  even  in  the  presence  of  Balak,  as  well  as  of  the 
Moabitish  messengers.  He  asked  His  will,  and  followed  it  (chap.  xxii. 
8,  13,  18,  19,  38,  xxiii.  12),  and  would  not  go  with  the  messengers 
of  Balak,  therefore,  till  God  had  given  him  permission  (chap.  xxii. 
20).  If  he  had  been  altogether  destitute  of  the  fear  of  God,  he 
would  have  complied  at  once  with  Balak's  request.  And  again, 
although  at  the  outset  it  is  only  Elohim  who  makes  known  His  will 
(chap.  xxii.  9,  20),  and  even  when  he  first  of  all  goes  out  in  search 
of  oracles,  it  is  Elohim  who  comes  to  him  (chap,  xxiii.  4) ;  yet  not 
only  does  the  angel  of  JeJiovah  meet  him  by  the  way  (chap.  xxii.  22 
sqq.),  but  JeJiovah  also  puts  words  into  his  mouth,  which  he  an- 
nounces to  the  king  of  the  Moabites  (chap,  xxiii.  5,  12,  16),  so  that 
all  his  prophecies  are  actually  uttered  from  a  mind  moved  and 
governed  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  that  not  from  any  physical 
constraint  exerted  upon  him  by  God,  but  in  such  a  manner  that  he 
enters  into  them  with  all  his  heart  and  soul,  and  heartily  desires  to 
die  the  death  of  these  righteous,  i.e,  of  the  people  of  Israel  (chap, 
xxiii.  10)  ;  and  when  he  finds  that  it  pleases  Jehovah  to  bless  Israel, 
he  leaves  off  resorting  any  longer  to  auguries  (chap.  xxiv.  1),  and 
eventually  declares  to  the  enraged  monarch,  that  he  cannot  trans- 

^  *'  The  fact  that  he  made  use  of  so  extremely  uncertain  a  method  as  augury, 
the  insufficiency  of  which  was  admitted  even  by  the  heathen  themselves  (vid. 
Ndgelshack,  homer.  Theol.  pp.  154  sqq.),  and  which  no  true  prophet  among  the 
Israelites  ever  employed,  is  to  be  attributed  to  the  weakness  of  the  influence 
exerted  upon  him  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  When  the  Spirit  worked  with  power, 
there  was  no  need  to  look  round  at  nature  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the 
will  of  God"  {Hencjstenberg). 


CHAP.  XXII.  2-XXIV.  25,  161 

gress  the  command  of  Jehovah,  even  if  the  king  should  give  him 
his  house  full  of  silver  and  gold  (chap.  xxiv.  13).^ 

This  double-sidedness  and  ambiguity  of  the  religious  and  pro- 
phetic character  of  Balaam  may  be  explained  on  the  supposition 
that,  being  endowed  with  a  predisposition  to  divination  and  prophecy, 
he  practised  soothsaying  and  divination  as  a  trade ;  and  for  the 
purpose  of  bringing  this  art  to  the  greatest  possible  perfection, 
brought  not  only  the  traditions  of  the  different  nations,  but  all  the 
phenomena  of  his  own  times,  within  the  range  of  his  observations. 
In  this  way  he  may  have  derived  the  first  elements  of  the  true 
knowledge  of  God  from  different  echoes  of  the  tradition  of  the 
primeval  age,  which  was  then  not  quite  extinct,  and  may  possibly 
have  heard  in  his  own  native  land  some  notes  of  the  patriarchal 
revelations  out  of  the  home  of  the  tribe-fathers  of  Israel.  But 
these  traditions  are  not  sufficient  of  themselves  to  explain  his  attitude 
towards  Jehovah,  and  his  utterances  concerning  Israel.  Balaam's 
peculiar  knowledge  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  and  of  all  that 
He  had  done  to  His  people,  and  his  intimate  acquaintance  with  the 
promises  made  to  the  patriarchs,  which  strike  us  in  his  prophecies 
(comp.  chap,  xxiii.  10  with  Gen.  xiii.  16,  xxiii.  24 ;  chap.  xxiv.  9 
with  Gen.  xlix.  9 ;  and  chap.  xxiv.  17  with  Gen.  xlix.  10),  can  only 
be  explained  from  the  fact  that  the  report  of  the  great  things  which 
God  had  done  to  and  for  Israel  in  Egypt  and  at  the  Dead  Sea,  had 
not  only  spread  among  all  the  neighbouring  tribes,  as  was  foretold 
in  Ex.  XV.  14,  and  is  attested  by  Jethro,  Ex.  xviii.  1  sqq.,  and 
Rahab  the  Canaanite,  Josh.  ii.  9  sqq.,  but  had  even  penetrated  into 
Mesopotamia,  as  the  countries  of  the  Euphrates  had  maintained  a 
steady  commercial  intercourse  from  the  very  earliest  times  with 
Hither  Asia  and  the  land  of  Egypt.    Through  these  tidings  Balaam 

^  The  significant  interchange  in  the  use  of  the  names  of  God,  "which  is  seen 
in  the  fact,  that  from  the  very  outset  Balaam  always  speaks  of  Jehovah  (chap. 
xxii.  8,  13, 18, 19), — whereas,  according  to  the  historian,  it  is  only  Elohim  who 
reveals  Himself  to  him  (chap.  xxii.  9,  10,  12), — has  been  pointed  out  by  Heng- 
stenherg  in  his  Dissertations ;  and  even  Baur,  in  his  Geschichte  der  alttestl. 
Weissagung  (i.  p.  334),  describes  it  as  a  "  fine  distinction  ;"  but  neither  of  them 
satisfactorily  explains  this  diversity.  For  the  assumption  that  Balaam  is  thereby 
tacitly  accused  of  hypocrisy  (Hengstenberg),  or  that  the  intention  of  the  writer 
is  to  intimate  that  "  the  heathen  seer  did  not  stand  at  first  in  any  connection 
•whatever  with  the  true  God  of  Israel"  (Baur),  sets  up  a  chasm  between  Elohim 
and  JehovaJi,  with  which  the  fact  that,  according  to  chap.  xxii.  22,  the  wrath  of 
Elohim  on  account  of  Balaam's  journey  was  manifested  in  the  appearance  of  the 
angel  of  Jehovah^  is  irreconcilable.     The  manifestation  of  God  in  the  form  of 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  L 


162  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

was  no  doubt  induced  not  only  to  procure  more  exact  information 
concerning  the  events  themselves,  that  he  might  make  a  profitable 
use  of  it  in  connection  with  his  own  occupation,  but  also  to  dedicate 
himself  to  the  service  of  Jehovah,  "  in  the  hope  of  being  able  to 
participate  in  the  new  powers  conferred  upon  the  human  race ;  so 
that  henceforth  he  called  Jehovah  his  God,  and  appeared  as  a 
prophet  in  His  name"  (Hengstenberg),  In  this  respect  Balaam 
resembles  the  Jewish  exorcists,  who  cast  out  demons  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  without  following  Christ  (Mark  ix.  38,  39 ;  Luke  ix.  49), 
but  more  especially  Simon  Magus,  his  "  New  Testament  antitype," 
who  was  also  so  powerfully  attracted  by  the  new  divine  powers  of 
Christianity  that  he  became  a  believer,  and  submitted  to  baptism, 
because  he  saw  the  signs  and  great  miracles  that  were  done  (Acts 
viii.  13).  And  from  the  very  time  when  Balaam  sought  Jehovah, 
the  fame  of  his  prophetical  art  appears  to  have  spread.  It  was  no 
doubt  the  report  that  he  stood  in  close  connection  with  the  God  of 
Israel,  which  induced  Balak,  according  to  chap.  xxii.  6,  to  hire  him 
to  oppose  the  Israelites ;  as  the  heathen  king  shared  the  belief,  which 
was  common  to  all  the  heathen,  that  Balaam  was  able  to  work  upon 
the  God  he  served,  and  to  determine  and  regulate  His  will.  God 
had  probably  given  to  the  soothsayer  a  few  isolated  but  memorable 
glimpses  of  the  unseen,  to  prepare  him  for  the  service  of  His 
kingdom.  But  "  Balaam's  heart  was  not  right  with  God,"  and  "  he 
loved  the  wages  of  unrighteousness"  (Acts  viii.  21;  2  Pet.  ii.  15). 
His  thirst  for  honour  and  wealth  was  not  so  overcome  by  the  reve- 
lations of  the  true  God,  that  he  could  bring  himself  to  give  up  his 
soothsaying,  and  serve  the  living  God  with  an  undivided  heart. 
Thus  it  came  to  pass,  that  through  the  appeal  addressed  to  him  by 
Balak,  he  was  brought  into  a  situation  in  which,  although  he  did 
not  venture  to  attempt  anything  in  opposition  to  the  will  of  Jehovah, 

the  angel  of  JeJiovaJt,  was  only  a  higher  stage  of  the  previous  manifestations 
of  Eloliim.  And  all  that  follows  from  this  is,  that  Balaam's  original  attitude 
towards  Jehovah  was  a  very  imperfect  one,  and  not  yet  in  harmony  with  the 
true  nature  of  the  God  of  Israel.  In  his  JeJiovah  Balaam  worshipped  only 
EloJiijn,  i.e.  only  a  divine  being,  but  not  the  God  of  Israel,  who  was  first  of  all 
revealed  to  him  according  to  His  true  essence,  in  the  appearance  of  the  angel  of 
Jehovah,  and  still  more  clearly  in  the  words  which  Pie  put  into  his  mouth.  This 
is  indicated  by  the  use  of  Elohvn,  in  chap.  xxii.  9,  10,  12.  In  the  other  pas- 
sages, where  this  name  of  God  stiU  occurs,  it  is  required  by  the  thought,  viz.  in 
chap.  xxii.  22,  to  express  the  essential  identity  of  EloMm  and  the  Maleach 
Jehovah ;  and  in  chap.  xxii.  38,  xxiii.  27,  and  xxiv.  2,  to  show  that  Balaam  did 
not  speak  out  of  his  oicn  mind,  but  from  the  inspiration  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 


CHAP.  XXII.  2-21.  163 

his  heart  was  never  thoroughly  changed ;  so  that,  whilst  he  refused 
the  honours  and  rewards  that  were  promised  him  by  Balak,  and 
pronounced  blessings  upon  Israel  in  the  strength  of  the  Spirit  of 
God  that  came  upon  him,  he  was  overcome  immediately  afterwards 
by  the  might  of  the  sin  of  his  own  unbroken  heart,  fell  back  into 
the  old  heathen  spirit,  and  advised  the  Midianites  to  entice  the 
Israelites  to  join  in  the  licentious  worship  of  Baal  Peor  (chap.  xxxi. 
16),  and  was  eventually  put  to  death  by  the  Israelites  when  they 
conquered  these  their  foes  (chap.  xxxi.  8).^ 

Chap.  xxii.  2-21.  Balaam  hired  by  Balak  to  curse  Israel. 
— Vers.  2-4.  As  the  Israelites  passed  by  the  eastern  border  of  the 
land  of  Moab,  the  Moabites  did  not  venture  to  make  any  attack 
upon  them ;  on  the  contrary,  they  supplied  them  with  bread  and 
water  for  money  (Deut.  ii.  29).  At  that  time  they  no  doubt 
cherished  the  hope  that  Sihon,  their  own  terrible  conqueror,  would 
be  able  with  perfect  ease  either  to  annihilate  this  new  foe,  or  to 
drive  them  back  into  the  desert  from  which  they  had  come.  But 
when  they  saw  this  hope  frustrated,  and  the  Israelites  had  over- 
thrown the  two  kings  of  the  Amorites  with  victorious  power,  and 
had  conquered  their  kingdoms,  and  pressed  forward  through  what 
was  formerly  Moabitish  territory,  even  to  the  banks  of  the  Jordan, 
the  close  proximity  of  so  powerful  a  people  filled  Balak,  their  king, 
with  terror  and  dismay,  so  that  he  began  to  think  of  the  best  means 
of  destroying  them.  There  was  no  ground  for  such  alarm,  as  the 
Israelites,  in  consequence  of  divine  instructions  (Deut.  ii.  9),  had 
offered  no  hostilities  to  the  Moabites,  but  had  conscientiously  spared 
their  territory  and  property ;  and  even  after   the  defeat   of   the 

^  When  modern  critics,  such  as  Kjiohel,  Baur,  etc.,  affirm  that  the  tradition 
in  chap.  xxxi.  8, 16,  Josh.  xiii.  22 — viz.  that  Balaam  was  a  kosem^  or  soothsayer, 
who  advised  the  Midianites  to  seduce  the  Israelites  to  join  in  the  worship  of 
Baal — is  irreconcilable  with  the  account  in  chap.  xxii.-xxiv.  concerning  Balaam 
himself,  his  attitude  towards  Jehovah,  and  his  prophecies  with  regard  to  Israel, 
they  simply  display  their  own  incapacity  to  comprehend,  or  form  any  psycho- 
logical appreciation  of,  a  religious  character  such  as  Balaam  ;  but  they  by  no 
means  prove  that  the  account  in  chap,  xxii.-xxiv.  is  interpolated  by  the  Jehovist 
into  the  Elohistic  original.  And  all  that  they  adduce  as  a  still  further  confirma- 
tion of  this  hypothesis  (namely,  that  the  weaving  of  prophetic  announcements 
into  the  historical  narrative,  the  interchange  of  the  names  of  God,  Jehovah,  and 
Elohim,  the  appearance  of  the  angel  of  the  Lord,  the  talking  of  the  ass,  etc.,  are 
foreign  to  the  Elohistic  original),  are  simply  assertions  and  assumptions,  which 
do  not  become  any  more  conclusive  from  the  fact  that  they  are  invariably 
adduced  when  no  better  arguments  can  be  hunted  up. 


164  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Amorites,  had  not  turned  their  arms  against  them,  but  had  advanced 
to  the  Jordan  to  take  possession  of  the  land  of  Canaan.  But  the 
supernatural  might  of  the  people  of  God  was  a  source  of  such  dis- 
comfort to  the  king  of  the  Moabites,  that  a  horror  of  the  Israelites 
came  upon  him.  Feeling  too  weak  to  attack  them  wdth  force  of 
arms,  he  took  counsel  with  the  elders  of  Midian.  With  these  words, 
"  This  crowd  will  now  lick  up  all  our  environs,  as  the  ox  licketh  up  the 
gi'een  of  the  field^^  i.e.  entirely  consume  all  our  possessions,  he  called 
their  attention  to  the  danger  which  the  proximity  of  Israel  would 
bring  upon  him  and  his  territory,  to  induce  them  to  unite  with  him 
in  some  common  measures  against  this  dangerous  foe.  This  in- 
tention is  implied  in  his  words,  and  clearly  follows  from  the  sequel 
of  the  history.  According  to  ver.  7,  the  elders  of  Midian  went  to 
Balaam  with  the  elders  of  Moab ;  and  there  is  no  doubt  that  the 
Midianitish  elders  advised  Balak  to  send  for  Balaam,  with  whom 
they  had  become  acquainted  upon  their  trading  journeys  (cf.  Gen. 
xxxvii.),  to  come  and  curse  the  Israelites.  Another  circumstance 
also  points  to  an  intimate  connection  between  Balaam  and  the 
Midianites,  namely,  the  fact  that,  after  he  had  been  obliged  to  bless 
the  Israelites  in  spite  of  the  inclination  of  his  own  natural  heart, 
he  went  to  the  Midianites  and  advised  them  to  make  the  Israelites 
harmless,  by  seducing  them  to  idolatry  (chap.  xxxi.  16).  The 
Midianites,  who  are  referred  to  here,  must  be  distinguished  from 
the  branch  of  the  same  tribe  which  dwelt  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai 
(chap.  X.  29,  30 ;  Ex.  ii.  15,  16,  iii.  1).  They  had  been  settled  for 
a  long  time  (cf.  Gen.  xxxvi.  35)  on  the  eastern  border  of  the 
Moabitish  and  Amoritish  territory,  in  a  grassy  but  treeless  steppe- 
land,  where  many  ruins  and  wells  are  still  to  be  found  belonging  to 
very  ancient  times  (Buckingham,  Syr,  ii.  pp.  79  sqq.,  95  sqq.),  and 
lived  by  grazing  (chap.  xxxi.  32  sqq.)  and  the  caravan  trade.  They 
were  not  very  warlike,  and  w^ere  not  only  defeated  by  the  Edomites 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  35),  but  were  also  subdued  and  rendered  tributary  by 
Sihon,  king  of  the  Amorites  (see  at  chap.  xxxi.  8).  In  the  time  of 
the  Judges,  indeed,  they  once  invaded  the  land  of  Israel  in  company 
with  the  Amalekites  and  the  sons  of  the  East,  but  they  were  beaten 
by  Gideon,  and  entirely  repulsed  (Judg.  vi.  and  vii.),  and  from  that 
time  forth  they  disappear  entirely  from  history.  The  "  elders  of 
Midian "  are  heads  of  tribes,  who  administered  the  general  affairs 
of  the  people,  who,  like  the  Israelites,  lived  under  a  patriarclial 
constitution.  The  most  powerful  of  them  bore  the  title  of  "  kings" 
(chap.  xxxi.  8)  or  "  princes"  (Josh.  xiii.  21).     The  clause,  "  and 


I 


CHAP.  XXII.  2-21.  165 

Balak,  the  son  of  Zippor,  was  king  of  the  Moabites  at  that  time," 
is  added  as  a  supplementary  note  to  explain  the  relation  of  Balak 
to  the  Moabites. 

Vers.  5  and  6.  Balak  sent  messengers  to  Balaam  to  Petlior  in 
Mesopotamia.  The  town  of  Petitory  or  PetJiora  (^aBovpa,  LXX.), 
is  unknown.  There  is  something  very  uncertain  in  KnoheVs  sup- 
position, that  it  is  connected  with  ^adovaai,  a  place  to  the  south  of 
Circessium  {Zozim,  iii.  14),  and  with  the  BeOavva  mentioned  by 
Ptolemy,  v.  18,  6,  and  that  these  are  the  same  as  AnaJi,  ^AvaOcoy 
Anatha  (^Ammian.  MarcelL  xxiv.  1,  6).  And  the  conjecture  that 
the  name  is  derived  from  "iri3,  to  interpret  dreams  (Gen.  xli.  8), 
and  marks  the  place  as  a  seat  of  the  possessors  of  secret  arts,  is  also 
more  than  doubtful,  since  "i^3  corresponds  to  "iriQ  in  Aramaean; 
although  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  Pet/ior  may  have  been  a  noted 
seat  of  Babylonian  magi,  since  these  wise  men  were  accustomed  to 
congregate  in  particular  localities  (cf.  Straho,  xvi.  1,  §  6,  and  MiXn- 
ter  Relig.  der  Bahyl.  p.  86).  Balak  desired  Balaam  to  come  and 
curse  the  people  of  Israel,  who  had  come  out  of  Egypt,  and  were 
so  numerous  that  they  covered  the  eye  of  the  earth  (see  Ex.  x.  5), 
i.e,  the  whole  face  of  the  land,  and  sat  down  (were  encamped) 
opposite  to  him  ;  that  he  might  then  perhaps  be  able  to  smite  them 
and  drive  them  out  of  the  land.  On  nns  for  IK,  the  imperative  of 
"l'^^f,  see  Ewald,  §  228,  b. — "  For  I  know  that  he  whom  thou  blessest 
is  blessed,  and  he  whom  thou  cursest  is  cursed^  Balak  believed,  in 
common  with  the  whole  of  the  ancient  world,  in  the  real  power  and 
operation  of  the  curses,  anathemas,  and  incantations  pronounced  by 
priests,  soothsayers,  and  goetce.  And  there  was  a  truth  at  the 
foundation  of  this  belief,  however  it  may  have  been  perverted  by 
heathenism  into  phantasy  and  superstition.  When  God  endows  a 
man  with  supernatural  powers  of  His  word  and  Spirit,  he  also  con- 
fers upon  him  the  power  of  working  upon  others  in  a  supernatural 
way.  Man,  in  fact,  by  virtue  of  the  real  connection  between  his  spirit 
and  the  higher  spiritual  world,  is  able  to  appropriate  to  himself 
supernatural  powers,  and  make  them  subservient  to  the  purposes  of 
sin  and  wickedness,  so  as  to  practise  magic  and  witchcraft  with  them, 
arts  which  we  cannot  pronounce  either  mere  delusion  or  pure  super- 
stition, since  the  scriptures  of  both  the  Old  and  New  Testaments 
speak  of  witchcraft,  and  condemn  it  as  a  real  power  of  evil  and  of 
the  kingdom  of  darkness  (see  vol.  i.  p.  476).  Even  in  the  narrative 
itself,  the  power  of  Balaam  to  bless  and  to  curse  is  admitted ;  and, 
in  addition  to  this,  it  is  frequently  celebrated  as  a  great  favour  dis- 


166  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

played  towards  Israel,  that  the  Lord  did  not  hearken  to  Balaam, 
but  turned  the  curse  into  a  blessing  (Deut.  xxiii.  5  ;  Josh.  xxiv.  10 ; 
Micah  vi.  3 ;  Neh.  xiii.  2).  This  power  of  Balaam  is  not  there- 
fore traced,  it  is  true,  to  the  might  of  heathen  deities,  but  to  the 
might  of  Jehovah,  whose  name  Balaam  confessed ;  but  yet  the 
possibility  is  assumed  of  his  curse  doing  actual,  and  not  merely 
imaginary,  harm  to  the  Israelites.  Moreover,  the  course  of  the 
history  shows  that  in  his  heart  Balaam  was  very  much  inclined  to 
fulfil  the  desire  of  the  king  of  the  Moabites,  and  that  this  subjective 
inclination  of  his  was  overpowered  by  the  objective  might  of  the 
Spirit  of  Jehovah. 

Vers.  7-14.  When  the  elders  of  Moab  and  Midian  came  to 
him  with  wages  of  divination  in  their  hand,  he  did  not  send  them 
away,  but  told  them  to  spend  the  night  at  his  house,  that  he  might 
bring  them  word  what  Jehovah  would  say  to  him.  ^''pD'^j  from 
DDj^j  soothsaying,  signifies  here  that  which  has  been  wrought  or 
won  by  soothsaying — the  soothsayer's  wages ;  just  as  nnb^n^  which 
signifies  literally  glad  tidings,  is  used  in  2  Sam.  iv.  10  for  the 
wages  of  glad  tidings ;  and  T'VS,  »^?VS,  which  signifies  work,  is  fre- 
quently used  for  that  which  is  wrought,  the  thing  acquired,  or  the 
wages.  If  Balaam  had  been  a  true  prophet  and  a  faithful  servant 
of  Jehovah,  he  would  at  once  have  sent  the  messengers  away  and 
refused  their  request,  as  he  must  then  have  known  that  God 
would  not  curse  His  chosen  people.  But  Balaam  loved  the  wages 
of  unrighteousness.  This  corruptness  of  his  heart  obscured  his 
mind,  so  that  he  turned  to  God  not  as  a  mere  form,  but  with  the 
intention  and  in  the  hope  of  obtaining  the  consent  of  God  to  his 
undertaking.  And  God  came  to  him  in  the  night,  and  made 
known  His  will.  Whether  it  was  through  the  medium  of  a 
dream  or  of  a  vision,  is  not  recorded,  as  this  was  of  no  moment 
in  relation  to  the  subject  in  hand.  The  question  of  God  in  ver. 
9,  "  Who  are  these  men  with  theef"  not  only  served  to  introduce 
the  conversation  (Knobel),  but  was  intended  to  awaken  "the 
slumbering  conscience  of  Balaam,  to  lead  him  to  reflect  upon  the 
proposal  which  the  men  had  made,  and  to  break  the  force  of  his 
sinful  inclination*'  (Hengstenherg). — Ver.  12.  God  then  expressly 
forbade  him  to  go  with  the  messengers  to  curse  the  Israelites,  as 
the  people  was  blessed ;  and  Balaam  was  compelled  to  send  back 
the  messengers  without  attaining  their  object,  because  Jehovah  had 
refused  him  permission  to  go  with  them.  ''?""'9''^7  ^^^^'  ■'-1?  imper.  of 
npJ  =  nni?  (see  at  Lev.  xxiv.  11). 


CHAP.  XXII.  2-21.  167 

Vers.  15-21.  The  answer  with  which  Balaam  had  sent  the 
Moabitish  messengers  away,  encouraged  Balak  to  cherish  the  hope 
of  gaining  over  the  celebrated  soothsayer  to  his  purpose  notwith- 
standing, and  to  send  an  embassy  "  of  princes  more  numerous  and 
more  honourable  than  those,"  and  to  make  the  attempt  to  over- 
come his  former  resistance  by  more  splendid  promises  ;  whether  he 
regarded  it,  as  is  veiy  probable,  "  as  the  remains  of  a  weakly  fear 
of  God,  or  simply  as  a  ruse  adopted  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining 
better  conditions"  {Heiigstenherg).  As  a  genuine  heathen,  who 
saw  nothing  more  in  the  God  of  Israel  than  a  national  god  of  that 
people,  he  thought  that  it  would  be  possible  to  render  not  only  men, 
but  gods  also,  favourable  to  his  purpose,  by  means  of  splendid 
honours  and  rich  rewards.^ — Vers.  18,  19.  But  Balaam  replied  to 
the  proposals  of  these  ambassadors :  "  If  Balak  gave  me  his  house 
full  of  silver  and  gold,  I  cannot  transgress  the  mouth  (command)  of 
Jehovah,  my  God,  to  do  Utile  or  great,"  i.e.  to  attempt  anything  in 
opposition  to  the  will  of  the  Lord  (cf.  1  Sam.  xx.  2,  xxii.  15,  xxv. 
36).  The  inability  flowed  from  moral  awe  of  God  and  dread  of 
His  punishment.  "From  beginning  to  end  this  fact  was  firmly 
established  in  Balaam's  mind,  viz.  that  in  the  work  to  which  Balak 
summoned  him  he  could  do  nothing  at  all  except  through  Jehovah. 
This  knowledge  he  had  acquired  by  virtue  of  his  natural  gifts  as 
seer,  and  his  previous  experience.  But  this  clear  knowledge  of 
Jehovah  was  completely  obscured  again  by  the  love  for  the  wages 
which  ruled  in  his  heart.  Because  he  loved  Balak,  the  enemy 
of  Israel,  for  the  sake  of  the  wages,  whereas  Jehovah  loved  Israel 
for  His  own  name's  sake ;  Balaam  was  opposed  to  Jehovah  in  his  in- 
most nature  and  will,  though  he  knew  himself  to  be  in  unison  with 
Him  by  virtue  of  his  natural  gift.  Consequently  he  fell  into  the 
same  blindness  of  contradiction  to  which  Balak  was  in  bondage" 
(Baumgarten).  And  in  this  blindness  he  hoped  to  be  able  to  turn 
Jehovah  round  to  oppose  Israel,  and  favour  the  wishes  of  his  own 
and  Balak's  heart.  He  therefore  told  the  messengers  to  wait  again, 
that  he  might  ask  Jehovah  a  second  time  (ver.  19).     And  this 

^  Compare  the  following  remarks  of  Pliny  (h.  n.  xxviii.  4)  concerning  this 
belief  among  the  Romans  :  "  Verrius  Flaccus  auctores  ponit,  quibus  credat,  in 
oppugnationibus  ante  omnia  solitum  a  Romanis  sacerdotibus  evocari  Deum,  cujus 
in  tutela  id  oppidum  esset,  promittique  illi  eundem  aut  ampliorem  apud  Romanos 
cultum.  Et  durat  in  Pontijicum  disciplina  id  sacrum^  constat'que  ideo  occuUatum^ 
in  cujus  Dei  tutela  Roma  esset^  ne  qui  hostium  simili  modo  agerent;^^ — and  the 
further  explanations  of  this  heathen  notion  in  Hengstenberg's  Balaam  and  his 
Prophecies. 


168  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

time  (ver.  20)  God  allowed  him  to  go  with  them,  but  only  on  the 
condition  that  he  should  do  nothing  but  what  He  said  to  him.  The 
apparent  contradiction  in  His  first  of  all  prohibiting  Balaam  from 
going  (ver.  12),  then  permitting  it  (ver.  20),  and  then  again,  when 
Balaam  set  out  in  consequence  of  this  permission,  burning  with 
anger  against  him  (ver.  22),  does  not  indicate  any  variableness  in 
the  counsels  of  God,  but  vanishes  at  once  when  we  take  into  ac- 
count the  pedagogical  purpose  of  the  divine  consent.  When  the 
first  messengers  came  and  Balaam  asked  God  whether  he  might  go 
with  them  and  curse  Israel,  God  forbade  him  to  go  and  curse. 
But  since  Balaam  obeyed  this  command  with  inward  repugnance, 
when  he  asked  a  second  time  on  the  arrival  of  the  second  embassy, 
God  permitted  him  to  go,  but  on  the  condition  already  mentioned, 
namely,  that  he  was  forbidden  to  curse.  God  did  this  not  merely 
because  it  was  His  own  intention  to  put  blessings  instead  of  curses 
into  the  prophet's  mouth, — and  "  the  blessings  of  the  celebrated  pro- 
phet might  serve  as  means  of  encouraging  Israel  and  discouraging 
their  foes,  even  though  He  did  not  actually  stand  in  need  of  them" 
(Knobel), — but  primarily  and  principally  for  the  sake  of  Balaam 
himself,  viz.  to  manifest  to  this  soothsayer,  who  had  so  little  sus- 
ceptibility for  higher  influences,  both  His  own  omnipotence  and 
true  deity,  and  also  the  divine  election  of  Israel,  in  a  manner  so 
powerful  as  to  compel  him  to  decide  either  for  or  against  the  God 
of  Israel  and  his  salvation.  To  this  end  God  permitted  him  to  go 
to  Balak,  though  not  without  once  more  warning  him  most  power- 
fully by  the  way  of  the  danger  to  which  his  avarice  and  ambition 
would  expose  him.  This  immediate  intention  in  the  guidance  of 
Balaam,  by  which  God  would  have  rescued  him  if  possible  from 
the  way  of  destruction,  into  which  he  had  been  led  by  the  sin 
which  ruled  in  his  heart,  does  not  at  all  preclude  the  much  further- 
reaching  design  of  God,  which  was  manifested  in  Balaam's  bless- 
ings, namely,  to  glorify  His  own  name  among  the  heathen  and  in 
Israel,  through  the  medium  of  this  far-famed  soothsayer. 

Vers.  22-35.  Balaam's  Speaking  Ass. — Yer.  22.  ''And  the 
anger  of  God  burned,  that  he  was  going  (t^^n  "n^in)  :  and  the  angel  of 
Jehovah  placed  himself  in  the  loay,  as  an  adversary  to  himr  From 
the  use  of  the  participle  "ij^in  instead  of  the  imperfect,  with  which 
it  is  not  interchangeable,  it  is  evident,  on  the  one  hand,  that  the 
anger  of  God  was  not  excited  by  the  fact  that  Balaam  went  with 
the  elders  of  Moab,  but  by  his  behaviour  either  on  setting  out  or 


CHAP.  XXII.  22-35.  169 

upon  the  journey  ;^  and,  on  the  other  hand,  that  the  occurrence 
which  followed  did  not  take  place  at  the  commencement,  but  rather 
towards  the  close  of,  the  journey.  As  it  was  a  longing  for  wages 
and  honour  that  had  induced  the  soothsayer  to  undertake  the  jour- 
ney, the  nearer  he  came  to  his  destination,  under  the  guidance  of 
the  distinguished  Moabitish  ambassadors,  the  more  was  his  mind 
occupied  with  the  honours  and  riches  in  prospect ;  and  so  completely 
did  they  take  possession  of  his  heart,  that  he  was  in  danger  of  cast- 
ing to  the  winds  the  condition  which  had  been  imposed  upon  him 
by  God.  The  wrath  of  God  was  kindled  against  this  dangerous 
enemy  of  his  soul ;  and  as  he  was  riding  upon  his  ass  with  two 
attendants,  the  angel  of  the  Lord  stood  in  his  w^ay  y?  I^K^p,  "  as  an 
adversary  to  Jmriy"  i.e,  to  restrain  him  from  advancing  farther  on  a 
road  that  would  inevitably  lead  him  headlong  into  destruction  (cf. 
ver.  32).  This  visible  manifestation  of  God  (on  the  angel  of  the 
Lord,  see  vol.  i.  pp.  185  sqq.)  was  seen  by  the  ass ;  but  Balaam  the 
seer  was  so  blinded,  that  it  was  entirely  hidden  from  his  eye, 
darkened  as  it  was  by  sinful  lust ;  and  this  happened  three  times 
before  Jehovah  brought  him  to  his  senses  by  the  speaking  of  the 
dumb  animal,  and  thus  opened  his  eyes.^  The  "  drawn  sword"  in 
the  angel's  hand  was  a  manifestation  of  the  wrath  of  God.     The 

^  From  a  failure  to  observe  the  use  of  the  participle  in  distinction  from  the 
preterite,  and  from  a  misinterpretation  of  the  words  of  the  angel  of  the  liOrd 
(ver.  32),  "  I  have  come  out  as  an  adversary,  for  the  way  leads  headlong  to 
destruction,"  which  have  been  understood  as  implying  that  the  angel  meant  to 
prohibit  the  seer  from  going,  whereas  he  only  intended  to  warn  him  of  the 
destruction  towards  which  he  was  going,  the  critics  have  invented  a  contradic- 
tion between  the  account  of  the  speaking  ass  (vers.  22-35)  and  the  preceding 
part  of  the  history.  And  in  consequence  of  this,  A.  G.  Hoffmann  and  others 
have  pronounced  the  section  from  ver.  22  to  ver.  35  to  be  a  later  interpolation ; 
whilst  Baur^  on  the  other  hand  (in  his  Geschichte  d.  alttesil.  Weissagung),  regards 
the  account  of  the  ass  as  the  original  form  of  the  narrative,  and  the  preceding 
portion  as  a  composition  of  the  Jehovist.  But  there  is  no  "  contradiction"  or 
*'  evident  incongruity,"  unless  we  suppose  that  the  only  reason  for  the  appear- 
ance of  the  angel  of  the  Lord  was,  that  he  might  once  more  forbid  the  seer  to 
go,  and  then  give  him  permission,  with  a  certain  limitation.  The  other  dif- 
ferences, which  E.  V.  Ortenherg  adduces,  are  involved  in  the  very  nature  of  the 
case.  The  manifestation  of  God,  in  the  form  of  the  Angel  of  Jehovah,  was 
necessarily  different  in  its  character  from  a  direct  spiritual  revelation  of  the 
divine  will.  And  lastly,  the  difference  in  the  expressions  used  to  signify  "  three 
times,^^  in  chap.  xxii.  28,  32,  33,  and  chap.  xxiv.  10,  etc.,  prove  nothing  more  than 
that  king  Balak  did  not  mould  his  style  of  speaking  according  to  that  of  the  ass. 

2  "  To  the  great  disgrace  of  the  prophet,  the  glory  of  the  angel  was  first  of 
all  apparent  to  the  ass.  ...  He  had  been  boasting  before  this  of  extraordinary 


170  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

ass  turned  from  the  road  into  the  field  before  the  threatening  sight, 
and  was  smitten  by  Balaam  in  consequence  to  turn  her  or  guide 
her  back  into  the  road. — ^Yers.  24,  25.  The  angel  then  stationed 
himself  in  a  pass  of  the  vineyards  where  walls  ("i^?  vineyard  walls, 
Isa.  V.  5)  were  on  both  sides,  so  that  the  animal,  terrified  by  the 
angel,  pressed  against  the  wall,  and  squeezed  Balaam's  foot  against 
the  wall,  for  which  Balaam  smote  her  again. — Vers.  26,  27.  The 
angel  moved  still  farther,  and  stationed  himself  in  front  of  him,  in 
so  narrow  a  pass,  that  there  was  no  room  to  move  either  to  the  right 
or  to  the  left.  As  the  ass  could  neither  turn  aside  nor  go  past  this 
time,  she  threw  herself  down.  Balaam  was  still  more  enraged  at 
this,  and  smote  her  with  the  stick  Q]^}P^,  which  he  carried ;  see  Gen. 
xxxviii.  18). — Vers.  28  sqq.  "  Then  Jehovah  opened  the  mouth  of  the 
ass^  and  she  said  to  Balaam,  What  have  I  done  to  thee,  that  thou  hast 
smitten  me  noiv  thi^ee  times  ? "  But  Balaam,  enraged  at  the  refrac- 
toriness of  his  ass,  replied,  "  Because  thou  hast  played  me  ill  (/E^^^, 
see  Ex.  X.  2) :  if  there  were  only  a  sword  in  my  hand,  verily  1  should 
now  have  killed  theeP  But  the  ass  replied,  that  she  had  been  ridden 
by  him  from  a  long  time  back,  and  had  never  been  accustomed  to 
act  in  this  way  towards  him.  These  words  of  the  irrational  beast, 
the  truth  of  which  Balaam  was  obliged  to  admit,  made  an  impres- 
sion upon  him,  and  awakened  him  out  of  his  blindness,  so  that  God 
could  now  open  his  eyes,  and  he  saw  the  angel  of  the  Lord. 

In  this  miraculous  occurrence,  which  scoffers  at  the  Bible  con- 
stantly bring  forward  as  a  weapon  of  attack  upon  the  truth  of  the 
word  of  God,  the  circumstance  that  the  ass  perceived  the  appear- 
ance of  the  angel  of  the  Lord  sooner  than  Balaam  did,  does  not 
present  the  slightest  difficulty ;  for  it  is  a  well-known  fact,  that 
irrational  animals  have  a  much  keener  instinctive  presentiment  of 
many  natural  phenomena,  such  as  earthquakes,  storms,  etc.,  than 
man  has  with  the  five  senses  of  his  mind.  And  the  fact  is  equally 
undeniable,  that  many  animals,  e.g,  horses  and  cows,  see  the  so- 
called  second  sight,  and  are  terrified  in  consequence.-^  The  rock  of 
offence  in  this  narrative  is  to  be  found  in  the  rational  words  of  an 

visions,  and  now  what  was  visible  to  the  eyes  of  a  beast  was  invisible  to  him. 
Whence  came  this  blindness,  but  from  the  avarice  by  which  he  had  been  so 
stupefied,  that  he  preferred  filthy  lucre  to  the  holy  calHng  of  God?"  (Calvin.) 

^  In  support  of  this  we  will  simply  cite  the  following  from  the  remarks  made 
by  Martinui^on  this  subject,  and  quoted  by  Hengstenherg  in  his  Balaam  (p.  385), 
from  Passavanfs  work  on  animal  magnetism  and  clairvoyance  :  "  That  horses 
see  it  (the  second  sight),  is  also  evident  from  their  violent  and  rapid  snorting, 


CHAP.  XXII.  22-35.  171 

irrational  and  speechless  ass.  It  is  true,  that  in  the  actual  meaning 
of  the  words  there  is  nothing  beyond  the  sensations  and  feelings  to 
which  animals  constantly  give  utterance  in  gestures  and  inarticulate 
sounds,  when  subjected  to  cruel  treatment.  But  in  this  instance 
the  feelings  were  expressed  in  the  rational  words  of  human  lan- 
guage, which  an  animal  does  not  possess ;  and  hence  the  question 
arises.  Are  we  to  understand  this  miracle  as  being  a  purely  internal 
fact  of  an  ecstatic  nature,  or  a  fact  that  actually  came  under  the 
cognizance  of  the  senses  ?  If  we  examine  the  arguments  which 
Hengstenherg  has  adduced  in  favour  of  the  former,  and  Kurtz  in 
support  of  the  latter,  there  is  nothing  at  all  in  the  circumstance, 
that  the  narrative  itself  says  nothing  about  Balaam  being  in  an 
ecstasy,  nor  in  the  statement  that  "  Jehovah  opened  the  mouth  of 
the  ass,"  nor  lastly,  in  the  words  of  2  Pet.  ii.  16,  "  The  dumb  ass, 
speaking  with  man's  voice,  forbade  the  madness  of  the  prophet,"  to 
furnish  conclusive,  not  to  say  irresistible,  proofs  of  the  assertion, 
that  "  as  the  ass  was  corporeally  and  externally  visible,  its  speaking 
must  have  been  externally  and  corporeally  audible"  (Kurtz).  All 
that  is  contained  in  the  two  scriptural  testimonies  is,  that  the  ass 
spoke  in  a  way  that  was  perceptible  to  Balaam,  and  that  this  speak- 
ing was  effected  by  Jehovah  as  something  altogether  extraordinary. 
But  whether  Balaam  heard  the  words  of  the  animal  with  the  out- 
ward, i.e.  the  bodily  ear,  or  with  an  inward  spiritual  eai",  is  not 
decided  by  them.  On  the  other  hand,  neither  the  fact  that  Balaam 
expressed  no  astonishment  at  the  ass  speaking,  nor  the  circumstance 
that  Balaam's  companions — viz.  his  two  servants  (ver.  22)  and  the 
Moabitish  messengers,  who  were  also  present,  according  to  ver.  35 — 
did  not  see  the  angel  or  hear  the  ass  speaking,  leads  with  certainty 
to  the  conclusion,  that  the  whole  affair  must  have  been  a  purely 
internal  one,  which  Balaam  alone  experienced  in  a  state  of  ecstasy, 
since  argumenta  e  silentio  confessedly  prove  but  very  little.  With 
regard  to  Balaam,  we  may  say  with  Augustine  (qucest.  50  in  Num.), 
"  he  was  so  carried  away  by  his  cupidity,  that  he  was  not  terrified 
by  this  marvellous  miracle,  and  replied  just  as  if  he  had  been 
speaking  to  a  man,  when  God,  although  He  did  not  change  the 
nature  of  the  ass  into  that  of  a  rational  being,  made  it  give  utter- 
ance to  whatever  He  pleased,  for  the  purpose  of  restraining  his 

when  their  rider  has  had  a  vision  of  any  kind  either  by  day  or  night.  And  in 
the  case  of  the  horse  it  may  also  be  observed,  that  it  will  refuse  to  go  any 
farther  in  the  same  road  until  a  circuitous  course  has  been  taken,  and  even  then 
it  is  quite  in  a  sweat." 


172  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

madness."  But  with  regard  to  the  Moabitish  messengers,  it  is  very 
doubtful  whether  they  were  eye-witnesses  and  auditors  of  the  affair. 
It  is  quite  possible  that  they  had  gone  some  distance  in  advance,  or 
were  some  distance  behind,  when  Balaam  had  the  vision.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  was  no  necessity  to  mention  particularly  that  they 
saw  the  appearance  of  the  angel,  and  heard  the  speaking  of  the 
animal,  as  this  circumstance  was  not  of  the  least  importance  in  con- 
nection with  the  main  purpose  of  the  narrative.  And  still  less  can 
it  be  said  that  "  the  ass's  speaking,  if  transferred  to  the  sphere 
of  outward  reality,  would  obviously  break  through  the  eternal 
boundary-line  which  has  been  drawn  in  Gen.  i.  between  the  human 
and  the  animal  world."  The  only  thing  that  would  have  broken 
through  this  boundary,  would  have  been  for  the  words  of  the  ass 
to  have  surpassed  the  feelings  and  sensations  of  an  animal ;  that  is 
to  say,  for  the  ass  to  have  given  utterance  to  truths  that  were  essen- 
tially human,  and  only  comprehensible  by  human  reason.  Now  that 
was  not  the  case.  All  that  the  ass  said  was  quite  within  the  sphere 
of  the  psychical  life  of  an  animal. 

The  true  explanation  lies  between  the  notion  that  the  whole 
occurrence  was  purely  internal,  and  consisted  exclusively  in  ecstasy 
brought  by  God  upon  Balaam,  and  the  grossly  realistic  reduction 
of  the  whole  affair  into  the  sphere  of  the  senses  and  the  outward 
material  world.  The  angel  who  met  the  soothsayer  in  the  road, 
as  he  was  riding  upon  his  ass,  and  who  was  seen  at  once  by  the 
ass,  though  he  was  not  seen  by  Balaam  till  Jehovah  had  opened 
his  eyes,  did  really  appear  upon  the  road,  in  the  outward  world  of 
the  senses.  But  the  form  in  which  he  appeared  was  not  a  grossly 
sensuous  or  material  form,  like  the  bodily  frame  of  an  ordinary 
visible  being ;  for  in  that  case  Balaam  would  inevitably  have  seen 
liim,  when  his  beast  became  alarmed  and  restive  again  and  again 
and  refused  to  go  forward,  since  it  is  not  stated  anywhere  that 
God  had  smitten  him  with  blindness,  like  the  men  of  Sodom  (Gen. 
xix.  11),  or  the  people  in  2  Kings  vi.  18.  It  rather  resembled  the 
appearance  of  a  spirit,  which  cannot  be  seen  by  every  one  who  has 
healthy  bodily  eyes,  but  only  by  those  who  have  their  senses 
awakened  for  visions  from  the  spirit-world.  Thus,  for  example,  the 
men  who  went  to  Damascus  with  Paul,  saw  no  one,  when  the  Lord 
appeared  to  him  in  a  miraculous  light  from  heaven,  and  spoke  to 
him,  although  they  also  heard  the  voice  ^  (Acts  ix.  7).     Balaam 

^  Or,  strictly  speaking,  they  saw  the  ligJit  (Acts  xxii.  9),  but  saw  no  man 
(Acts  ix.  7) ;  and  they  heard  the  sound  (jti;  ^auv^;^  the  voice  or  noise  generally, 


CHAP.  XXII.  22-35.  173 

wanted  the  spiritual  sense  to  discern  the  angel  of  the  Lord,  because 
his  spirit's  eye  was  blinded  by  his  thirst  for  wealth  and  honour. 
This  blindness  increased  to  such  an  extent,  with  the  inward  excite- 
ment caused  by  the  repeated  insubordination  of  his  beast,  that  he 
lost  all  self-control.  As  the  ass  had  never  been  so  restive  before, 
if  he  had  only  been  calm  and  thoughtful  himself,  he  would  have 
looked  about  to  discover  the  cause  of  this  remarkable  change,  and 
would  then,  no  doubt,  have  discovered  the  presence  of  the  angel. 
But  as  he  lost  all  his  thoughtfulness,  God  was  obliged  to  open  the 
mouth  of  the  dumb  and  irrational  animal,  to  show  a  seer  by  pro- 
fession his  own  blindness.  "  He  might  have  reproved  him  by  the 
words  of  the  angel ;  but  because  the  rebuke  would  not  have  been 
sufficiently  severe  without  some  deep  humiliation,  He  made  the 
beast  his  teacher"  {Calvin).  The  ass's  speaking  was  produced  by 
the  omnipotence  of  God ;  but  it  is  impossible  to  decide  whether  the 
modulation  was  miraculously  communicated  to  the  animal's  voice, 
so  that  it  actually  gave  utterance  to  the  human  words  which  fell 
upon  Balaam's  ears  (Kurtz),  or  whether  the  cries  of  the  animal 
were  formed  Into  rational  discourse  in  Balaam's  soul,  by  the  direct 
operation  of  God,  so  that  he  alone  heard  and  understood  the  speech 
of  the  animal,  whereas  the  servants  who  were  present  heard  nothing 
more  than  unintelligible  crles.^  In  either  case  Balaam  received  a 
deeply  humiliating  admonition  from  the  mouth  of  the  irrational  beast, 
and  that  not  only  to  put  him  to  shame,  but  also  to  call  him  to  his 
senses,  and  render  him  capable  of  hearing  the  voice  of  God.  The 
seer,  who  prided  himself  upon  having  eyes  for  divine  revelations, 
was  so  blind,  that  he  could  not  discern  the  appearance  of  the  angel, 
which  even  the  irrational  beast  had  been  able  to  see.^  By  this  he 
was  taught,  that  even  a  beast  is  more  capable  of  discerning  things 
from  the  higher  world,  than  a  man  bHnded  by  sinful  desires.  It 
was  not  till  after  this  humiliation  that  God  opened  his  eyes,  so  that 

Acts  ix.  7),  but  not  the  words  (r^v  (pav^v  rov  huT^ovvro;  fioi,  the  voice  or  articu- 
late words  of  the  person  speaking,  Acts  xxii.  9).  The  construction  of  cckovu, 
with  the  genitive  in  the  one  case  and  the  accusative  in  the  other,  is  evidently 
intended  to  convey  this  distinct  and  distinctive  meaning. — Tr. 

^  See  the  analogous  case  mentioned  in  John  xii.  28,  29,  of  the  voice  which 
came  to  Jesus  from  the  skies,  when  some  of  the  people  who  were  standing  by, 
said  that  it  only  thundered,  whilst  others  said  an  angel  spokq  to  Him. 

2  God  made  use  of  the  voice  of  an  ass,  both  because  it  was  fitting  that  a 
brutish  mind  should  be  taught  by  a  brute,  and  also,  as  Nyssenus  says,  to  instruct 
and  chastise  the  vanity  of  the  augur  (Balaam),  who  was  accustomed  to  observe 
the  meaning  of  the  braying  of  the  ass  and  the  chirping  of  birds  (C  a.  Lap.). 


174  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

he  saw  the  angel  of  the  Lord  with  a  drawn  sword  standing  in  his 
road,  and  fell  upon  his  face  before  this  fearful  sight. 

Vers.  32-34.  To  humble  him  deeply  and  inwardly,  the  Lord 
held  up  before  him  the  injustice  of  his  cruel  treatment  of  the  ass, 
and  told  him  at  the  same  time  that  it  had  saved  his  life  by  turning 
out  of  the  way.  "  /  have  come  out^^  said  the  angel  of  the  Lord, 
"  as  an  adversary ;  for  the  way  leads  headlong  into  destruction  before 
me ;"  Le.  the  way  which  thou  art  going  is  leading  thee,  in  my  eyes, 
in  my  view,  into  destruction,  t^'lj,  to  plunge,  sc,  into  destruction, 
both  here,  and  also  in  Job  xvi.  11,  the  only  other  passage  in  which 
it  occurs. — ^Yer.  33.  The  angel  of  the  Lord  sought  to  preserve 
Balaam  from  the  destruction  which  threatened  him,  by  standing 
in  his  way;  but  he  did  not  see  him,  though  his  ass  did.  *h^^ 
'1J1  nn^^,  "  perhaps  it  turned  out  before  me ;  for  otherwise  I  should 
surely  have  killed  thee,  and  let  her  live"  The  first  clause  is  to  be 
regarded,  as  Hengstenberg  supposes,  as  an  aposiopesis.  The  angel 
does  not  state  positively  what  was  the  reason  why  perhaps  the  ass 
had  turned  out  of  the  way :  he  merely  hints  at  it  lightly,  and  leaves 
it  to  Balaam  to  gather  from  the  hint,  that  the  faithful  animal  had 
turned  away  from  affection  to  its  master,  with  a  dim  foreboding  of 
the  danger  which  threatened  him,  and  yet  for  that  very  reason,  as 
it  were  as  a  reward  for  its  service  of  love,  had  been  ill-treated  by 
him.  The  traditional  rendering,  "  if  the  ass  had  not  turned  aside, 
surely,"  etc.,  cannot  be  defended  according  to  the  rules  of  the  lan- 
guage ;  and  there  is  not  sufficient  ground  for  any  such  alteration  of 
the  text  as  Knobel  suggests,  viz.  into  \^7.  These  words  made  an 
impression,  and  Balaam  made  this  acknowledgment  (ver.  34)  :  "  / 
have  sinned,  for  I  knew  not  that  thou  stoodest  in  the  way  against  me ; 
and  now,  if  it  displease  thee,  I  will  get  me  back  again."  The  angel 
of  the  Lord  repHed,  however  (ver.  35)  :  "  Go  ivith  the  men ;  but 
only  the  word  that  I  shall  speak  unto  thee,  that  shalt  thou  speaks 
This  was  sufficient  to  show  him,  that  it  was  not  the  journey  in  itself 
that  was  displeasing  to  God,  but  the  feelings  and  intentions  with 
which  he  had  entered  upon  it.  The  whole  procedure  was  intended 
to  sharpen  his  conscience  and  sober  his  mind,  that  he  might  pay 
attention  to  the  word  which  the  Lord  would  speak  to  him.  At  the 
same  time  the  impression  which  the  appearance  and  words  of  the 
angel  of  the  Lord  made  upon  his  heart,  enveloped  in  mist  as  it  was 
by  the  thirst  for  gold  and  honour,  was  not  a  deep  one,  nor  one  that 
led  him  to  a  thorough  knowledge  of  his  own  heart ;  otherwise, 
after  such  a  warning,  he  would  never  have  continued  his  journey. 


I 


CHAP.  XXII.  36-41.  175 

Vers.  36-41.  Eeception  of  Balaam  by  the  King  of  the 
MoABiTES. — Vers.  36,  37.  As  soon  as  Balak  heard  of  Balaam's 
coming,  he  went  to  meet  him  at  a  city  on  the  border  of  the  Arnon, 
which  flowed  at  the  extreme  (north)  boundary  (of  the  Moabitish 
territory),  viz.  at  Areopolis  (see  at  chap.  xxi.  15),  probably  the 
capital  of  the  kingdom  at  one  time,  but  now  reduced  to  a  frontier 
town,  since  Sihon  the  Amorite  had  taken  all  the  land  as  far  as  the 
Am  on ;  whilst  JRabbah,  which  was  farther  south,  had  been  selected 
as  the  residence  of  the  king.  By  coming  as  far  as  the  frontier  of 
his  kingdom  to  meet  the  celebrated  soothsayer,  Balak  intended  to. 
do  him  special  honour.  But  he  could  not  help  receiving  him  with 
a  gentle  reproof  for  not  having  come  at  his  first  invitation,  as  if 
he,  the  king,  had  not  been  in  a  condition  to  honour  him  according 
to  his  merits. — Yer.  38.  But  Balaam,  being  still  mindful  of  the 
warning  which  he. had  just  received  from  God,  replied,  "Xo,  I  am 
come  unto  thee  now  :  have  I  then  any  power  to  speak  anything  (sc,  of 
my  own  accord)  ?  The  word  which  God  puts  into  my  mouth,  that 
loill  I  speak.^^  With  this  reply  he  sought,  at  the  very  outset,  to 
soften  down  the  expectations  of  Balak,  inasmuch  as  he  concluded 
at  once  that  his  coming  was  a  proof  of  his  willingness  to  curse 
{Hengstenherg).  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Balaam  did  not  say  anything 
different  to  the  king  from  what  he  had  explained  to  his  messengers 
at  the  very  first  (cf.  ver.  18).  But  just  as  he  had  not  told  them 
the  whole  truth,  but  had  concealed  the  fact  that  Jehovah,  his  God, 
had  forbidden  the  journey  at  first,  on  the  ground  that  he  was  not 
to  curse  the  nation  that  was  blessed  (ver.  12),  so  he  could  not  ad- 
dress the  king  in  open,  unambiguous  words. — Vers.  39,  40.  He  then 
went  with  Balak  to  Kirjath-Chuzoth,  where  the  king  had  oxen  and 
sheep  slaughtered  in  sacrifice,  and  sent  flesh  to  Balaam  as  well  as 
to  the  princes  that  were  with  him  for  a  sacrificial  meal,  to  do  honour 
to  the  soothsayer  thereby.  The  sacrifices  were  not  so  much  thank- 
offerings  for  Balaam's  happy  arrival,  as  supplicatory  offerings  for 
the  success  of  the  undertaking  before  them.  "  This  is  evident,"  as 
Hengstenherg  correctly  observes,  "  from  the  place  and  time  of  their 
presentation ;  for  the  place  was  not  that  where  Balak  first  met  with 
Balaam,  and  they  were  only  presented  on  the  eve  of  the  great 
event."  Moreover,  they  were  offered  unquestionably  not  to  the 
Moabitish  idols,  from  which  Balak  expected  no  help,  but  to  Jehovah, 
whom  Balak  wished  to  draw  away,  in  connection  with  Balaam,  from 
His  own  people  (Israel),  that  he  might  secure  His  favour  to  the 
Moabites.     The  situation  of  Kirjath-Chiizoth,  which  is  only  men- 


176  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

tioned  here,  cannot  be  determined  with  absolute  certainty.  As 
Balak  went  with  Balaam  to  Bamoth-Baal  on  the  morning  following 
the  sacrificial  meal,  which  was  celebrated  there,  Kirjath-Chuzoth 
cannot  have  been  very  far  distant.  Knohel  conjectures,  with  some 
probability,  that  it  may  have  been  the  same  as  Kerioth  (Jer.  xlviii. 
24),  i.e.  Kereijat  or  Korriat,  at  the  foot  of  Jebel  Attarus,  at  the 
top  of  which  Bamoth-Baal  was  situated  (see  at  chap.  xxi.  19). — 
Ver.  41.  But  Balak  conducted  the  soothsayer  to  Bamoth-Baal,  not 
because  it  was  consecrated  to  Baal,  but  because  it  was  the  first 
height  on  the  way  to  the  steppes  of  Moab,  from  which  they  could 
see  the  camp  of  Israel,  or  at  all  events,  "  the  end  of  the  people," 
i.e.  the  outermost  portion  of  the  camp.  For  "  Balak  started  with 
the  supposition,  that  Balaam  must  necessarily  have  the  IsraeUtes  in 
view  if  his  curse  was  to  take  effect"  {Hengstenherg), 

Chap,  xxiii.  1-24.  Balaam's  First  Words. — Vers.  1-3.  Pre- 
parations for  the  first  act,  which  was  performed  at  Bamoth-Baal. 
At  Balaam's  command  Balak  built  seven  altars,  and  then  selected 
seven  bullocks  and  seven  rams,  which  they  immediately  sacrificed, 
namely,  one  bullock  and  one  ram  upon  each  altar.  The  nations  of 
antiquity  generally  accompanied  all  their  more  important  under- 
takings with  sacrifices,  to  make  sure  of  the  protection  and  help  of 
the  gods  ;  but  this  was  especially  the  case  with  their  ceremonies  of 
adjuration.  According  to  Diod,  Sic.  ii.  29,  the  Chaldeans  sought  to 
avert  calamity  and  secure  prosperity  by  sacrifices  and  adjurations. 
The  same  thing  is  also  related  of  other  nations  (see  Hengstenherg^ 
Balaam,  p.  392).  Accordingly,  Balaam  also  did  everything  that 
appeared  necessary,  according  to  his  own  religious  notions,  to  ensure 
the  success  of  Balak's  undertaking,  and  bring  about  the  desired 
result.  The  erection  of  seven  altars,  and  the  sacrifice  of  seven 
animals  of  each  kind,  are  to  be  explained  from  the  sacredness  ac- 
quired by  this  number,  through  the  creation  of  the  world  in  seven 
days,  as  being  the  stamp  of  work  that  was  well-pleasing  to  God. 
The  sacrifices  were  burnt-offerings,  and  were  offered  by  themselves 
to  Jehovah,  whom  Balaam  acknowledged  as  his  God. — Yers.  3,  4. 
After  the  offering  of  the  sacrifices,  Balaam  directed  the  king  to 
stand  by  his  burnt-offering,  i.e.  by  the  sacrifices  that  had  been 
offered  for  him  upon  the  seven  altars,  that  he  might  go  out  for 
auguries.  The  meaning  of  the  words,  "  /  will  go,  peradventure 
Jehovah  ivill  come  to  meet  me,^  is  apparent  from  chap.  xxiv.  1 :  and 
"  he  went  no  more  to  meet  with  the  auguries^'  (^""^C^  ^^®  ^*  Lev.  xix. 


'^ 


I 


CHAP.  XXIir.  1-24.  177 

26).  Balaam  went  out  to  look  for  a  manifestation  of  Jehovah  in 
the  significant  phenomena  of  nature.  The  word  which  Jehovah 
should  show  to  him,  he  would  report  to  Balak.  We  have  here  what 
is  just  as  characteristic  in  relation  to  Balaam's  religious  stand-point, 
as  it  is  significant  in  its  bearing  upon  the  genuine  historical  charac- 
ter of  the  narrative,  namely,  an  admixture  of  the  religious  ideas  of 
both  the  Israelites  and  the  heathen,  inasmuch  as  Balaam  hoped  to 
receive  or  discover,  in  the  phenomena  of  nature,  a  revelation  from 
Jehovah.  Because  heathenism  had  no  "  sure  word  of  prophecy,"  it 
sought  to  discover  the  will  and  counsel  of  God,  which  are  displayed 
in  the  events  of  human  history,  through  various  signs  that  were  dis- 
cernible in  natural  phenomena,  or,  as  Chrysippus  the  Stoic  expresses 
it  in  Cicero  de  divin,  ii.  63,  "  Signa  quce  a  Diis  hominihus  porten- 
danturr  ^  To  look  for  a  word  of  Jehovah  in  this  way,  Balaam 
betook  himself  to  a  "  hold  heiglitr  This  is  the  only  meaning  of 
••SK^,  from  nSK^j  to  rub,  to  scrape,  to  make  bare,  which  is  supported 
by  the  usage  of  the  language ;  it  is  also  in  perfect  harmony  with 
the  context,  as  the  heathen  augurs  were  always  accustomed  to  select 
elevated  places  for  their  auspices,  with  an  extensive  prospect,  espe- 
cially the  towering  and  barren  summits  of  mountains  that  were 
rarely  visited  by  men  (see  Hengstenherg,  ut  sup.),  Ewald,  how- 
ever, proposes  the  meaning  "  alone,"  or  "  to  spy,"  for  which  there 
is  not  the  slightest  grammatical  foundation. — Ver.  4.  "  And  God 
came  to  meet  Balaam"  who  thought  it  necessary,  as  a  true  hariolus, 
to  call  the  attention  of  God  to  the  altars  which  had  been  built  for 
Him,  and  the  sacrifices  that  had  been  offered  upon  them.  And  God 
made  known  His  will  to  him,  though  not  in  a  natural  sign  of  doubt- 
ful signification.  He  put  a  very  distinct  and  unmistakeable  word 
into  his  mouth,  and  commanded  him  to  make  it  known  to  the  king. 

^  See  the  remarks  of  Ndgelsbach  and  Hartung  on  the  nature  of  the  heathen 
auspices,  in  Hengstenherg's  Balaam  and  his  Prophecies  (pp.  396-7).  Hartung 
ohserves,  for  example :  "  As  the  gods  did  not  live  outside  the  world,  or  separated 
from  it,  but  the  things  of  time  and  space  were  filled  with  their  essence,  it  fol- 
lowed, as  a  matter  of  course,  that  the  signs  of  their  presence  were  sought  and 
seen  in  all  the  visible  and  audible  occurrences  of  nature,  whether  animate  or 
inanimate.  Hence  all  the  phenomena  which  affected  the  senses,  either  in  the 
elements  or  in  the  various  creatures,  whether  sounds  or  movements,  natural 
productions  or  events,  of  a  mechanical  or  physical,  or  voluntary  or  involuntary 
kind,  might  serve  as  the  media  of  revelation."  And  again  (p.  397)  :  "  The 
sign  in  itself  is  useless,  if  it  be  not  observed.  It  was  therefore  necessary  that 
man  and  God  should  come  to  meet  one  another,  and  that  the  sign  should  not 
merely  be  given,  but  should  also  be  received." 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  M 


178  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Vers.  7-10.  Balaam's  first  saying. — Having  come  back  to  the 
burnt-offerinff,  Balaam  commenced  his  utterance  before  the  kins: 
and  the  assembled  princes,  t'^b,  lit,  a  simile,  then  a  proverb, 
because  the  latter  consists  of  comparisons  and  figures,  and  lastly  a 
sentence  or  saying.  The  application  of  this  term  to  the  announce- 
ments made  by  Balaam  (vers.  7,  18,  xxiv.  3,  15,  20),  whereas  it 
is  never  used  of  the  prophecies  of  the  true  prophets  of  Jehovah, 
but  only  of  certain  songs  and  similes  inserted  in  them  (cf.  Isa. 
xiv.  4 ;  Ezek.  xvii.  2,  xxiv.  3 ;  Micah  ii.  4),  is  to  be  accounted 
for  not  merely  from  the  poetic  form  of  Balaam's  utterances,  the 
predominance  of  poetical  imagery,  the  sustained  parallelism,  the 
construction  of  the  whole  discourse  in  brief  pointed  sentences,  and 
other  peculiarities  of  poetic  language  (e.g,  iJ3,  chap.  xxiv.  3,  15), 
but  it  points  at  the  same  time  to  the  difference  which  actually  exists 
between  these  utterances  and  the  predictions  of  the  true  prophets. 
The  latter  are  orations  addressed  to  the  congregation,  which  deduce 
from  the  general  and  peculiar  relation  of  Israel  to  the  Lord  and  to 
His  law,  the  conduct  of  the  Lord  towards  His  people  either  in  their 
own  or  in  future  times,  proclaiming  judgment  upon  the  ungodly 
and  salvation  to  the  righteous.  "  Balaam's  mental  eye,"  on  the  con- 
trary, as  Hengstenherg  correctly  observes,  "  was  simply  fixed  upon 
what  he  saw ;  and  this  he  reproduced  without  any  regard  to  the 
impression  that  it  was  intended  to  make  upon  those  who  heard  it." 
But  the  very  first  utterance  was  of  such  a  character  as  to  deprive 
Balak  of  all  hope  that  his  wishes  would  be  fulfilled. — Ver.  7.  ''Balah, 
the  king  of  Moab,  fetches  me  from  Aram,  from  the  mountains  of  the 
Easty^  i.e.  of  Mesopotamia,  which  was  described,  as  far  back  as  Gen. 
xxix.  1,  as  the  land  of  the  sons  of  the  East  (cf.  chap.  xxii.  5). 
Balaam  mentions  the  mountains  of  his  home  in  contradistinction  to 
the  mountains  of  the  land  of  the  Moabites  upon  which  he  was  then 
standing.  "  Come,  curse  me  Jacob,  and  come  threaten  Israel."  Balak 
had  sent  for  him  for  this  purpose  (see  chap.  xxii.  11,  17).  noyfy 
for  npvtj  imperative  (see  Ewald,  §  228,  h.).  Dyj,  to  be  angry,  here 
to  give  utterance  to  the  wrath  of  God,  synonymous  with  ^\>\  or 
yip^,  to  curse.  Jacob :  a  poetical  name  for  the  nation,  equivalent 
to  Israel. — Yer.  8.  "  How  shall  I  curse  whom  God  does  not  curse, 
and  how  threaten  whom  Jehovah  does  not  threaten  ?"  Balak  imagined, 
like  all  the  heathen,  that  Balaam,  as  a  goetes  and  magician,  could 
distribute  blessings  and  curses  according  to  his  own  will,  and  put 
such  constraint  upon  his  God  as  to  make  Him  subservient  to  his 
own  will  (see  at  chap.  xxii.  6).     The  seer  opposes  this  delusion : 


CHAP.  XXIII.  1-24.  179 

The  God  of  Israel  does  not  curse  His  people,  and  therefore  His 
servant  cannot  curse  them.  The  following  verses  (vers.  9  and  10) 
give  the  reason  why  :  "  For  from  the  top  of  the  roch  I  see  him,  and 
from  the  hills  I  behold  him,  Lo,  it  is  a  people  that  dwelleth  apart, 
and  is  not  numbered  among  the  heathen.  Who  determines  the  dust 
of  Jacob,  and  in  number  the  fourth  part  of  Israel  ?  Let  my  soul  die 
the  death  of  the  righteous,  and  my  end  be  like  his  T^  There  were 
two  reasons  which  rendered  it  impossible  for  Balaam  to  curse  Israel : 
(1)  Because  they  were  a  people  both  outwardly  and  inwardly  dif- 
ferent from  other  nations,  and  (2)  because  they  were  a  people 
richly  blessed  and  highly  favoured  by  God.  From  the  top  of  the 
mountains  Balaam  looked  down  upon  the  people  of  Israel.  The 
outward  and  earthly  height  upon  which  he  stood  was  the  substratum 
of  the  spiritual  height  upon  which  the  Spirit  of  God  had  placed 
him,  and  had  so  enlightened  his  mental  sight,  that  he  was  able  to 
discern  all  the  peculiarities  and  the  true  nature  of  Israel.  In  this 
respect  the  first  thing  that  met  his  view  was  the  fact  that  this  people 
dwelt  alone.  Dwelling  alone  does  not  denote  a  quiet  and  safe  re- 
tirement, as  manv  commentators  have  infen'ed  from  Deut.  xxxiii. 
28,  Jer.  xlix.  31,  and  Micah  vii.  14 ;  but,  according  to  the  parallel 
clause,  "it  is  not  reckoned  among  the  nations,"  it  expresses  the 
separation  of  Israel  from  the  rest  of  the  nations.  This  separa- 
tion was  manifested  outwardly  to  the  seer's  eye  in  the  fact  that 
"  the  host  of  Israel  dwelt  by  itself  in  a  separate  encampment  upon 
the  plain.  In  this  his  spirit  discerned  the  inward  and  essential 
separation  of  Israel  from  all  the  heathen"  {Baumgarten),  This 
outward  "  dwelling  alone"  was  a  sjonbol  of  their  inward  separation 
from  the  heathen  world,  by  virtue  of  which  Israel  was  not  only 
saved  from  the  fate  of  the  heathen  world,  but  could  not  be  over- 
come by  the  heathen ;  of  course  only  so  long  as  they  themselves 
should  inwardly  maintain  this  separation  from  the  heathen,  and 
faithfully  continue  in  covenant  with  the  Lord  their  God,  who  had 
separated  them  from  among  the  nations  to  be  His  own  possession. 
As  soon  as  Israel  lost  itself  in  heathen  ways,  it  also  lost  its  own 
external  independence.  This  rule  applies  to  the  Israel  of  the  New 
Testament  as  well  as  the  Israel  of  the  Old,  to  the  congregation  or 
Church  of  God  of  all  ages.  3^'nn^  Np^  "  it  does  not  reckon  itself  among 
the  heathen  nations,"  i.e,  it  does  not  share  the  lot  of  the  other  nations,, 
because  it  has  a  different  God  and  protector  from  the  heathen  (cf^. 
Deut.  iv.  8,  xxxiii.  29).  The  truth  of  this  has  been  so  marvel- 
lously realized  in  the  history  of  the  Israelites,  notwithstanding  their 


180  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

falling  short  of  the  idea  of  their  divine  calling,  "  that  whereas  all  the 
mightier  kingdoms  of  the  ancient  world,  Egypt,  Assyria,  Babel, 
etc.,  have  perished  without  a  trace,  Israel,  after  being  rescued  from 
so  many  dangers  which  threatened  utter  destruction  under  the  Old 
Testament,  still  flourishes  in  the  Church  of  the  New  Testament, 
and  continues  also  to  exist  in  that  part  which,  though  rejected 
now,  is  destined  one  day  to  be  restored"  (jHengstenherg), 

In  this  state  of  separation  from  the  other  nations,  Israel  rejoiced 
in  the  blessing  of  its  God,  which  was  already  visible  in  the  innumer- 
able multitude  into  which  it  had  grown.  "  Who  has  ever  determined 
the  dust  of  Jacob  ?'*  As  the  dust  cannot  be  numbered,  so  is  the 
multitude  of  Israel  innumerable.  These  words  point  back  to  the 
promise  in  Gen.  xiii.  16,  and  applied  quite  as  much  to  the  existing 
state  as  to  the  future  of  Israel.  The  beginning  of  the  miraculous 
fulfilment  of  the  promise  given  to  the  patriarchs  of  an  innumerable 
posterity,  was  already  before  their  eyes  (cf.  Deut.  x.  22).  Even 
now  the  fourth  part  of  Israel  is  not  to  be  reckoned.  Balaam  speaks 
of  the  fourth  part  with  reference  to  the  division  of  the  nation  into 
four  camps  (chap,  ii,),  of  which  he  could  see  only  one  from  his 
point  of  view  (chap.  xxii.  41),  and  therefore  only  the  fourth  part 
of  the  nation.  "i^DD  is  an  accusative  of  definition,  and  the  subject 
and  verb  are  to  be  repeated  from  the  first  clause ;  so  that  there  is  no 
necessity  to  alter  "iSDD  into  ")BD  ^^. — But  Israel  was  not  only  visibly 
blessed  by  God  with  an  innumerable  increase ;  it  was  also  inwardly 
exalted  into  a  people  of  ^''1^^,  righteous  or  honourable  men.  The 
predicate  D"**!^^.  is  applied  to  Israel  on  account  of  its  divine  calling, 
because  it  had  a  God  who  was  just  and  right,  a  God  of  truth  and 
without  iniquity  (Deut.  xxxii.  4),  or  because  the  God  of  Israel  was 
holy,  and  sanctified  His  people  (Lev.  xx.  7,  8  ;  Ex.  xxxi.  13)  and 
made  them  into  a  Jeshurun  (Deut.  xxxii.  15,  xxxiii.  5,  2Qt).  Right- 
eousness, probity,  is  the  idea  and  destination  of  this  people,  which 
has  never  entirely  lost  it,  though  it  has  never  fuUy  realized  it. 
Even  in  times  of  general  apostasy  from  the  Lord,  there  was  always 
an  €K\oy7]  in  the  nation,  of  which  probity  and  righteousness  could 
truly  be  predicated  (cf.  1  Kings  xix.  18).  The  righteousness  of 
the  Israelites  was  "  a  product  of  the  institutions  which  God  had 
established  among  them,  of  the  revelation  of  His  holy  will  which 
He  had  given  them  in  His  law,  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  which  He 
had  linked  on  to  the  offering  of  sacrifices,  and  of  the  communica- 
tion of  His  Spirit,  which  was  ever  living  and  at  work  in  His  Church, 
and  in  it  alone"  {Hengstenherg).     Such  a  people  Balaam  could  not 


CHAP.  XXIII.  1-24.  181 

curse ;  lie  could  only  wish  tliat  the  end  of  his  own  life  might  re- 
semble the  end  of  these  righteous  men.  Death  is  introduced  here 
as  the  end  and  completion  of  life.  "  Balaam  desires  for  himself 
the  entire,  full,  indestructible,  and  inalienable  blessedness  of  the 
Israelite,  of  which  death  is  both  the  close  and  completion,  and  also 
the  seal  and  attestation"  (Kurtz).  This  desire  did  not  involve  the 
certain  hope  of  a  blessed  life  beyond  the  grave,  which  the  Israelites 
themselves  did  not  then  possess ;  it  simply  expressed  the  thought 
that  the  death  of  a  pious  Israelite  was  a  desirable  good.  And  this 
it  was,  whether  viewed  in  the  light  of  the  past,  the  present,  or  the 
future.  In  the  hour  of  death  the  pious  Israelite  could  look  back 
with  blessed  satisfaction  to  a  long  life,  rich  "in  traces  of  the  bene- 
ficent, forgiving,  delivering,  and  saving  grace  of  God;"  he  could 
comfort  himself  with  the  delightful  hope  of  living  on  in  his  children 
and  his  children's  children,  and  in  them  of  participating  in  the 
future  fulfilment  of  the  divine  promises  of  grace  ;  and  lastly,  Avhen 
dying  in  possession  of*  the  love  and  grace  of  God,  he  could  depart 
hence  with  the  joyful  confidence  of  being  gathered  to  his  fathers 
in  Sheol  (Gen.  xxv.  8). 

Vers.  11-17.  Balak  reproached  Balaam  for  this  utterance,  which 
announced  blessings  to  the  Israelites  instead  of  curses.  But  he  met 
his  reproaches  with  the  remark,  that  he  was  bound  by  the  command 
of  Jehovah.  The  infinitive  absolute,  ^3,  after  the  finite  verb,  ex- 
presses the  fact  that  Balaam  had  continued  to  give  utterance  to  no- 
thing but  blessings.  '^'^Tp  "IDC',  to  observe  to  speak  ;  "i^^,  to  notice 
carefully,  as  in  Deut.  v.  1,  29,  etc.  But  Balak  thought  that  the  reason 
might  be  found  in  the  unfavourable  locality ;  he  therefore  led  the 
seer  to  "  the  field  of  the  watchers^  upon  the  top  of  Pisgah"  whence  he 
could  see  the  whole  of  the  people  of  Israel.  The  words  '1J1  l^Xin  n^'j^ 
(ver.  13)  are  to  be  rendered,  "  whence  thou  wilt  see  it  (Israel) ;  thou 
seest  only  the  end  of  it,  hut  not  the  whole  of  it^^  (sc.  here  upon  Bamoth- 
Baal).  This  is  required  by  a  comparison  of  the  verse  before  us  with 
chap.  xxii.  41,  where  it  is  most  unquestionably  stated,  that  upon  the 
top  of  Bamoth-Baal  Balaam  only  saw  "  the  end  of  the  people."  For 
this  reason  Balak  regarded  that  place  as  unfavourable,  and  wished 
to  lead  the  seer  to  a  place  from  which  he  could  see  the  people, 
without  any  limitation  whatever.  Consequently,  notwithstanding 
the  omission  of  ""S  (for),  the  words  ^nvjj  Das  can  only  be  intended 
to  assign  the  reason  why  Balak  supposed  the  first  utterances  of 
Balaam  to  have  been  unfavourable,  invi^  =  Dyn  nvp,  the  end  of  the 
people  (chap.  xxii.  41),  cannot  possibly  signify  the  whole  nation, 


182  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

or,  as  March,  de  Geer,  Gesenius,  and  Kurtz  suppose,  "  the  people 
from  one  end  to  the  other,"  in  which  case  DVn  nvp  (the  end  of  the 
people)  would  signify  the  very  opposite  of  ^nvi^  (the  end  of  it)  ;  for 
Dyn  n^ip  is  not  interchangeable,  or  to  be  identified,  with  nvj5»  Dyn'?3 
(Gen.  xix.  4),  "  the  whole  people,  from  the  end  or  extremity  of  it," 
or  from  its  last  man ;  in  other  words,  "  to  the  very  last  man."  Still 
less  does  DVn  nvjp  DSX  signify  "  the  uttermost  end  of  the  whole 
people,  the  end  of  the  entire  people,"  notwithstanding  the  fact  that 
Kurtz  regards  the  expression,  "  the  end  of  the  end  of  the  people," 
as  an  intolerable  tautology.  ^J^i^,  imperative  with  nun  epenth.,  from 
2?i5.  The  "  field  of  the  watchers,"  or  "  spies  (zophim),  upon  the 
top  of  Pisgah"  corresponds,  no  doubt,  to  "  the  field  of  Moab,  upon 
the  top  of  PisgaJiy^  on  the  west  of  Heshbon  (see  at  chap.  xxi.  20). 
Mount  Nehoj  from  which  Moses  surveyed  the  land  of  Canaan  in  all 
its  length  and  breadth,  was  one  summit,  and  possibly  the  summit  of 
Pisgah  (see  Deut.  iii.  27,  xxxiv.  1).  The  field  of  the  spies  was 
very  probably  a  tract  of  table-land  upon  Nebo ;  and  so  called  either 
because  watchers  were  stationed  there  in  times  of  disturbance,  to 
keep  a  look-out  all  round,  or  possibly  because  it  was  a  place  where 
augurs  made  their  observations  of  the  heavens  and  of  birds  (Knobel). 
The  locality  has  not  been  thoroughly  explored  by  travellers ;  but 
from  the  spot  alluded  to,  it  must  have  been  possible  to  overlook  a 
very  large  portion  of  the  Arhoth  Moab,  Still  farther  to  the  nortli, 
and  nearer  to  the  camp  of  the  Israelites  in  these  Arboth,  was  the 
summit  of  Peor,  to  which  Balak  afterwards  conducted  Balaam 
(ver.  28),  and  where  he  not  only  saw  the  whole  of  the  people,  but 
could  see  distinctly  the  camps  of  the  different  tribes  (chap,  xxi  v.  2). 
— Vers.  14^-17.  Upon  Pisgah,  Balak  and  Balaam  made  the  same 
preparations  for  a  fresh  revelation  from  God  as  upon  Bamoth-Baal 
(vers.  1-6).  nb  in  ver.  15  does  not  mean  "  here"  or  "  yonder,"  but 
"  so"  or  "  thus,"  as  in  every  other  case.  The  thought  is  this  :  "  Do 
thou  stay  (sc.  as  thou  art),  and  I  will  go  and  meet  thus"  (sc,  in  the 
manner  required).  nnpK  (I  will  go  and  meet)  is  a  technical  term  here 
for  going  out  for  auguries  (chap.  xxiv.  1),  or  for  a  divine  revelation. 

Yers.  18—24.  The  second  saying "  Up,   Balak,  and  hear! 

Hearken  to  me,  son  of  Zippor  !"  D^ip,  "stand  up,"  is  a  call  to 
mental  elevation,  to  the  perception  of  the  word  of  God ;  for  Balak 
was  standing  by  his  sacrifice  (ver.  17).  ri^.r*  with  ^P,  as  in  Job 
xxxii.  11,  signifies  a  hearing  which  presses  forward  to  the  speaker, 
Le.  in  keen  and  minute  attention  {Hengstenherg),  i^S,  with  the 
antiquated  union  vowel  for  |3 ;  see  at  Gen.  i.  24. — Ver.  19.  "  God 


CHAP.  XXIII.  1-24.  183 

is  not  a  man,  that  He  should  lie  ;  nor  a  son  of  man,  that  He  should 
repent :  hath  He  said,  and  should  He  not  do  it  ?  and  spoken,  and 
should  not  carry  it  out  ?  " — ^Ver.  20.  "  Behold,  I  have  received  to  bless : 
and  He  hath  blessed ;  and  I  cannot  turn  it"  Balaam  meets  Balak's 
expectation  that  he  will  take  back  the  blessing  that  he  has  uttered, 
with  the  declaration,  that  God  does  not  alter  His  purposes  like 
changeable  and  fickle  men,  but  keeps  His  word  unalterably,  and 
carries  it  into  execution.  The  unchangeableness  of  the  divine 
purposes  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  the  unchangeableness  of  the 
divine  nature.  With  regard  to  His  own  counsels,  God  repents  of 
nothing ;  but  this  does  not  prevent  the  repentance  of  God,  under- 
stood as  an  anthropopathic  expression,  denoting  the  pain  expe- 
rienced by  the  love  of  God,  on  account  of  the  destruction  of  its 
creatures  (see  at  Gen.  vi.  6,  and  Ex.  xxxii.  14).  The  n  before  fc<^n 
(ver.  19)  is  the  interrogative  n  (see  Ges.  §  100,  4).  The  two 
clauses  of  ver.  19&,  "  Hath  He  spoken,"  etc.,  taken  by  themselves, 
are  no  doubt  of  universal  application ;  but  taken  in  connection  witli 
the  context,  they  relate  specially  to  what  God  had  spoken  through 
Balaam,  in  his  first  utterance  with  reference  to  Israel,  as  we  may 
see  from  the  more  precise  explanation  in  ver.  20,  "  Behold,  I  have 
received  to  bless"  (npP,  taken,  accepted),  etc.  ^^^t?,  to  lead  back, 
to  make  a  thing  retrograde  (Isa.  xliii.  13).  Samuel  afterwards 
refused  Saul's  request  in  these  words  of  Balaam  (ver.  19a),  when 
he  entreated  him  to  revoke  his  rejection  on  the  part  of  God  (1  Sam. 
XV.  29). — Ver.  21.  After  this  decided  reversal  of  Balak's  expecta- 
tions, Balaam  carried  out  still  more  fully  the  blessing  which  had 
been  only  briefly  indicated  in  his  first  utterance.  "  He  beholds  not 
wickedness  in  Jacob,  and  sees  not  suffering  in  Israel :  Jehovah  his  God 
is  with  him,  and  the  shout  (jubilation)  of  a  king  in  the  midst  of  him^ 
The  subject  in  the  first  sentence  is  God  (see  Hab.  i.  3,  13).  God 
sees  not  jl^J,  worthlessness,  wickedness,  and  ^^V,  tribulation,  misery, 
as  the  consequence  of  sin,  and  therefore  discovers  no  reason  for 
cursing  the  nation.  That  this  applied  to  the  people  solely  by  virtue 
of  their  calling  as  the  holy  nation  of  Jehovah,  and  consequently 
that  there  is  no  denial  of  the  sin  of  individuals,  is  evident  from  the 
second  hemistich,  which  expresses  the  thought  of  the  first  in  a  posi- 
tive form  :  so  that  the  words,  "  Jehovah  his  God  is  with  him,"  cor- 
respond to  the  words,  "  He  beholds  not  wickedness ;"  and  "  the 
shout  of  a  king  in  the  midst  of  it,"  to  His  not  seeing  suffering. 
Israel  therefore  rejoiced  in  the  blessing  of  God  only  so  long  as  it 
remained  faithful  to  the  idea  of  its  divine  calling,  and  continued  in 


184  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

covenant  fellowship  with  the  Lord.  So  long  the  power  of  the  world 
could  do  it  no  harm.  Tlie  "  shout  of  a  king"  in  Israel  is  the  re- 
joicing of  Israel  at  the  fact  that  Jeliovah  dwells  and  rules  as  King 
in  the  midst  of  it  (cf.  Ex.  xv.  18  ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  5).  Jehovah  had 
manifested  Himself  as  King,  by  leading  them  out  of  Egypt. — • 
Ver.  22.  "  God  brings  them  out  of  Egypt ;  his  strength  is  like  that  of 
a  buffalo."  ^^  is  God  as  the  strong,  or  mighty  one.  The  participle 
DN''ViD  is  not  used  for  the  preterite,  but  designates  the  leading  out 
as  still  going  on,  and  lasting  till  the  introduction  into  Canaan. 
The  plural  suffix,  Q— ,  is  used  ad  sensum,  with  reference  to  Israel 
as  a  people.  Because  God  leads  them,  they  go  forward  with  the 
strength  of  a  buffalo,  nisjnrij  from  ^V^,  to  weary,  signifies  that 
which  causes  weariness,  exertion,  the  putting  forth  of  power ;  hence 
the  fulness  of  strength,  ability  to  make  or  bear  exertions.  DK"|  is 
the  buffalo  or  wild  ox,  an  indomitable  animal,  which  is  especially 
fearful  on  account  of  its  horns  (Job  xxxix.  9-11 ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  17  ; 
Ps.  xxii.  22). — Yer.  23.  The  fellowship  of  its  God,  in  which  Israel 
rejoiced,  and  to  which  it  owed  its  strength,  was  an  actual  truth. 
"  For  there  is  no  augury  in  Jacob,  and  no  divination  in  Israel,  At 
the  time  it  is  spoken  to  Jacob,  and  to  Israel  what  God  doethV  ^3  does 
not  mean,  "  so  that,  as  an  introduction  to  the  sequel,"  as  Knobel 
supposes,  but  "  for,''  as  a  causal  particle.  The  fact  that  Israel  was 
not  directed,  like  other  nations,  to  the  uncertain  and  deceitful  in- 
strumentality of  augury  and  divination,  but  enjoyed  in  all  its  con- 
cerns the  immediate  revelation  of  its  God,  furnished  the  proof  that 
it  had  its  God  in  the  midst  of  it,  and  was  guided  and  endowed  with 
power  by  God  Himself,  l^'nj  and  Dpi;},  olQ)vcafjb6<;  and  fzavrela, 
augicrium  et  divinatio  (LXX.,  Vulg.),  were  the  two  means  employed 
by  the  heathen  for  looking  into  futurity.  The  former  (see  at  Lev. 
xix.  2Q)  was  the  unfolding  of  the  future  from  signs  in  the  pheno- 
mena of  nature,  and  inexplicable  occurrences  in  animal  and  human 
life ;  the  latter,  prophesying  from  a  pretended  or  supposed  revela- 
tion of  the  Deity  within  the  human  mind.  W3^  "  according  to  the 
time,"  i.e,  at  the  right  time,  God  revealed  His  acts.  His  counsel,  and 
His  will  to  Israel  in  His  word,  which  He  had  spoken  at  first  to  the 
patriarchs,  and  afterwards  through  Moses  and  the  prophets.  In 
this  He  revealed  to  His  people  in  truth,  and  in  a  way  that  could 
not  deceive,  what  the  heathen  attempted  in  vain  to  discover  through 
augury  and  divination  (cf.  Deut.  xviii.  14-19).^ — Yer.  24.  Through 

^  "  What  is  here  affirmed  of  Israel,  applies  to  the  Church  of  all  ages,  and  also 
to  every  individual  believer.     The  Church  of  God  knows  from  His  word  what 


:;f 


CHAP.  XXIII.  25- XXIV.  25.  185 

the  power  of  its  God,  Israel  was  invincible,  and  would  crush  all  its 
foes.  "  Behold,  it  rises  up,  a  people  like  the  lioness,  and  lifts  itself  up 
nice  the  lion.  It  lies  not  doion  till  it  eats  dust,  and  drinks  the  blood  of 
the  slain"  What  the  patriarch  Jacob  prophesied  of  Judah,  the 
ruler  among  his  brethren,  in  Gen.  xlix.  9,  Balaam  here  transfers  to 
the  whole  nation,  to  put  to  shame  all  the  hopes  indulged  by  the 
Moabitish  king  of  the  conquest  and  destruction  of  Israel. 

Chap,  xxiii.  25-xxiv.  25.  Balaam's  Last  Words. — Vers. 
25-30.  Balak  was  not  deterred,  however,  from  making  another 
attempt.  At  first,  indeed,  he  exclaimed  in  indignation  at  these 
second  sayings  of  Balaam  :  "  Thou  shalt  neither  curse  it,  nor  even 
bless"  The  double  D3  with  xi)  signifies  "neither — nor;"  and  the 
rendering,  "  if  thou  do  not  curse  it,  thou  shalt  not  bless  it,"  must 
be  rejected  as  untenable.  In  his  vexation  at  the  second  failure,  he 
did  not  want  to  hear  anything  more  from  Balaam.  But  when  he 
replied  again,  that  he  had  told  him  at  the  very  outset  that  he  could 
do  nothing  but  what  God  should  say  to  him  (cf.  chap.  xxii.  38), 
he  altered  his  mind,  and  resolved  to  conduct  Balaam  to  another 
place  with  this  hope :  ^^  per  adventure  it  will  please  God  that  thou 
mayest  curse  me  them  from  thence^  Clericus  observes  upon  this 
passage,  "  It  was  the  opinion  of  the  heathen,  that  what  was  not 
obtained  through  the  first,  second,  or  third  victim,  might  neverthe- 
less be  secured  through  a  fourth ;"  and  he  adduces  proofs  from 
Suetonius,  Curtius,  Gellius,  and  others. — Ver.  29.  He  takes  the 
seer  "  to  the  top  of  Peor,  which  looks  over  the  face  of  the  desert " 
(Jeshimon :  see  at  chap.  xxi.  20),  and  therefore  was  nearer  to  the 
camp  of  the  Israelites.  Mount  Peor  was  one  peak  of  the  northern 
part  of  the  mountains  of  Abarim  by  the  town  of  Beth-peor,  which 
aftenvards  belonged  to  the  Reubenites  (Josh.  xiii.  20),  and  opposite 
to  which  the  Israelites  were  encamped  in  the  steppes  of  Moab 
(Deut.  iii.  29,  iv.  46).  According  to  Eusebius  (Onom.  s.  v.  keycap), 
Peor  was  above  Libias  (i.e.  Bethharam),^  which  was  situated  in  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan ;  and  according  to  the  account  given  under 

God  does,  and  what  it  has  to  do  in  consequence.  The  wisdom  of  this  world 
resembles  augm-y  and  divination.  The  Church  of  God,  which  is  in  possession 
of  His  word,  has  no  need  of  it,  and  it  only  leads  its  followers  to  destruction, 
from  inabiUty  to  discern  the  will  of  God.  To  discover  this  with  certainty,  is  the 
great  privilege  of  the  Church  of  God"  {Hengstenherg). 

*  '  H-TTtpKitroci  Sg  rvig  uvv  At^tahog  KothovfAiurig.     Jerome  has  "  in  svpercilio 
Lihiados.''^ 


186  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


Arahoth  Moah^  it  was  close  by  the  Arbotli  Moab,  opposite  to  Jericho, 
on  the  way  from  Libias  to  Heshbon.  Peor  was  about  seven  Koman 
miles  from  Heshbon,  according  to  the  account  given  s.  v.  Danaba ; 
and  Beth-peor  (s.  v.  BethpJiozor)  was  near  Mount  Peor,  opposite  to 
Jericho,  six  Eoman  miles  higher  than  Libias,  i.e.  to  the  east  of  it 
(see  Ilengstenberg,  Balaam,  p.  538). — Vers.  29,  30.  The  sacrifices 
offered  in  preparation  for  this  fresh  transaction  were  the  same  as 
in  the  former  cases  (ver.  14,  and  vers.  1,  2). 

Chap.  xxiv.  1-9.  The  third  saying. — ^Vers.  1  and  2.  From  the 
two  revelations  which  he  had  received  before,  Balaam  saw,  i.e.  per- 
ceived, that  it  pleased  Jehovah  to  bless  Israel.  This  induced  him 
not  to  go  out  for  auguries,  as  on  the  previous  occasions.  DVS2"DyQ3, 
"  as  time  after  time,"  i.e.  as  at  former  times  (chap,  xxiii.  3  and  15). 
He  therefore  turned  his  face  to  the  desert,  i.e.  to  the  steppes  of 
Moab,  where  Israel  was  encamped  (chap.  xxii.  1).  And  when  he 
lifted  up  his  eyes,  "  he  saw  Israel  encamping  according  to  its  tribes ; 
and  the  Spirit  of  God  came  over  him"  The  impression  made  upon 
him  by  the  sight  of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  served  as  the  subjective 
preparation  for  the  reception  of  the  Spirit  of  God  to  inspire  him. 
Of  both  the  earlier  utterances  it  is  stated  that  "Jehovah  put  a 
word  into  his  mouth"  (chap,  xxiii.  5  and  16)  ;  but  of  this  third  it 
is  affirmed  that  "  the  Spirit  of  God  came  over  him."  The  former 
were  communicated  to  him,  when  he  went  out  for  a  divine  revela- 
tion, without  his  being  thrown  into  an  ecstatic  state ;  he  heard  the 
voice  of  God  within  him  telling  him  what  he  was  to  say.  But  this 
time,  like  the  prophets  in  their  prophesyings,  he  was  placed  by  the 
Spirit  of  God  in  a  state  of  ecstatic  sight ;  so  that,  with  his  eyes 
closed  as  in  clairvoyance,  he  saw  the  substance  of  the  revelation 
from  God  with  his  inward  mental  eye,  which  had  been  opened  by 
the  Spirit  of  God.  Thus  not  only  does  he  himself  describe  his 
own  condition  in  vers.  3  and  4,  but  his  description  is  in  harmony 
with  the  announcement  itself,  which  is  manifestly  the  result  both 
in  form  and  substance  of  the  intuition  effected  within  him  by  the 
Spirit  of  God. — Vers.  3  and  4  contain  the  preface  to  the  prophecy : 
"  The  divine  saying  of  Balaam  the  son  of  Beor,  the  divine  saying  of 
the  man  with  closed  eye,  the  divine  saying  of  the  hearer  of  divine 
words,  who  sees  the  vision  of  the  Almighty,  falling  down  and  with 
opened  eyes."  For  the  participial  noun  D^^J  the  meaning  divine 
saying  {effatum,  not  inspiratum,  Domini)  is  undoubtedly  established 

^   Keti    sari  roTTog   elg  ^svpo   ^itKuvf^euog   'TTocpcc  ra   opu   (^oyup^    6   'TrupocKurcct 
dviourau  otxo  Ai(itoe,'hog  i'^i  'Eaas^iovg  (i.e.  Heshbon)  rvig  '  Apx/5iecg  ccuriKpv  'lipix,u. 


CHAP.  XXIV.  1-9.  187 

by  the  expression  njn^  DW,  which  recurs  in  chap.  xiv.  28  and  Gen. 
xxii.  16,  and  is  of  constant  use  in  the  predictions  of  the  prophets ; 
and  this  appUes  even  to  the  few  passages  where  a  human  author  is 
mentioned  instead  of  Jehovah,  such  as  vers.  3,  4,  and  15,  16 ;  also 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  1 ;  Prov.  xxx.  1 ;  and  Ps.  xxxvi.  2,  where  a  Dt?3  is 
ascribed  to  the  personified  wickedness.  Hence,  when  Balaam  calls 
the  following  prophecy  a  DW,  this  is  done  for  the  purpose  of  desig- 
nating it  as  a  divine  revelation  received  from  the  Spirit  of  God. 
He  had  received  it,  and  now  proclaimed  it  as  a  man  \'V[J  DHK^,  with 
closed  eye.  ^^^  does  not  mean  to  open,  a  meaning  in  support  of 
which  only  one  passage  of  the  Mishnah  can  be  adduced,  but  to 
close,  like  DHp  in  Dan.  viii.  26,  and  Dnb^  in  Lam.  iii.  8,  with  the  ^ 
softened  into  D  or  C^  (see  Roediger  in  Ges.  thes.,  and  Dietriches 
Hebrew  Lexicon).  "  Balaam  describes  himself  as  the  man  with 
closed  eye  with  reference  to  his  state  of  ecstasy,  in  which  the  closing 
of  the  outer  senses  went  hand  in  hand  with  the  opening  of  the 
inner"  (Hengstenherg).  The  cessation  of  all  perception  by  means 
of  the  outer  senses,  so  far  as  self-conscious  reflection  is  concerned, 
was  a  feature  that  was  common  to  both  the  vision  and  the  dream, 
the  two  forms  in  which  the  prophetic  gift  manifested  itself  (chap, 
xii.  6),  and  followed  from  the  very  nature  of  the  inward  intuition. 
In  the  case  of  prophets  whose  spiritual  life  was  far  advanced,  in- 
spiration might  take  place  without  any  closing  of  the  outward 
senses.  But  upon  men  like  Balaam,  whose  inner  religious  life  was 
still  very  impure  and  undeveloped,  the  Spirit  of  God  could  only 
operate  by  closing  their  outward  senses  to  impressions  from  the 
lower  earthly  world,  and  raising  them  up  to  visions  of  the  higher 
and  spiritual  world.^  What  Balaam  heard  in  this  ecstatic  condi- 
tion was  PX  '•^px,  the  sayings  of  God,  and  what  he  saw  '''^^  HIH'?? 
the  vision  of  the  Almighty.  The  Spirit  of  God  came  upon  him 
with  sucli  power  that  he  fell  down  (/^^),  like  Saul  in  1  Sam. 
xix.  24 ;  not  merely  "  prostrating  himself  with  reverential  awe  at 
seeing  and  hearing  the  things  of  God  "  (Knobel),  but  thrown  to 
the  ground  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  who  "  came  like  an  armed  man 
upon  the  seer,"  and  that  in  such  a  way  that  as  he  fell  his  (spirit's) 

^  Hence,  as  Hengstenherg  observes  (Balaam,  p.  449),  we  have  to  picture 
Balaam  as  giving  utterance  to  his  prophecies  with  the  eyes  of  his  body  closed  ; 
though  we  cannot  argue  from  the  fact  of  his  being  in  this  condition,  that  an 
Isaiah  would  be  in  precisely  the  same.  Compare  the  instructive  information 
concerning  analogous  phenomena  in  the  sphere  of  natural  mantik  and  ecstasy  in 
Hengstenherg  (pp.  449  sqq.),  and  TholucTc's  PropJieten,  pp.  49  sqq. 


188  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


eyes  were  opened.  This  introduction  to  his  prophecy  is  not  ^n 
utterance  of  boasting  vanity;  but,  as  Calvin  coiTectly  observes, 
"•  the  whole  preface  has  no  other  tendency  than  to  prove  that  he 
was  a  true  prophet  of  God,  and  had  received  the  blessing  which  he 
uttered  from  a  celestial  oracle." 

The  blessing  itself  in  vers.  5  sqq.  contains  two  thoughts :  (1) 
the  glorious  prosperity  of  Israel,  and  the  exaltation  of  its  kingdom 
(vers.  5-7) ;  (2)  the  terrible  power,  so  fatal  to  all  its  foes,  of  the 
people  which  was  set  to  be  a  curse  or  a  blessing  to  all  the  nations 
(vers.  8,  9). — ^Vers.  5-7.  "  How  beautiful  are  thy  tents,  0  Jacob ! 
thy  dwellings^  0  Israel  I  Like  valleys  are  they  spread  out,  like 
gardens  by  the  stream,  like  aloes  which  Jehovah  has  planted,  like 
cedars  by  the  waters.  Water  will  flow  out  of  his  buckets,  and  his 
seed  is  by  many  waters.  And  loftier  than  Agag  be  his  king,  and  his  M\ 
kingdom  icill  be  exalted"  What  Balaam  had  seen  before  his  ecstasy  '■ 
with  his  bodily  eyes,  formed  the  substratum  for  his  inward  vision,  in 
which  the  dwellings  of  Israel  came  before  his  mental  eye  adorned 
with  the  richest  blessing  from  the  Lord.  The  description  starts,  it 
is  true,  from  the  time  then  present,  but  it  embraces  the  whole  future 
of  Israel.  In  the  blessed  land  of  Canaan  the  dwellings  of  Israel 
will  spread  out  like  valleys.  Dvnj  does  not  mean  brooks  here,  but 
valleys  watered  by  brooks.  n^j^  to  extend  oneself,  to  stretch  or 
spread  out  far  and  wide.  Yea,  "like  gardens  by  the  stream," 
which  are  still  more  lovely  than  the  grassy  and  flowery  valleys  with 
brooks.  This  thought  is  carried  out  still  further  in  the  two  follow- 
ing figures.  Ci^nx  are  aloe-trees,  which  grow  in  the  East  Indies, 
in  Siam,  in  Cochin  China,  and  upon  the  Moluccas,  and  from 
which  the  aloe- wood  was  obtained,  that  was  so  highly  valued  in 
the  preparation  of  incense,  on  account  of  its  fragrance.  As  the 
aloes  were  valued  for  their  fragrant  smell,  so  the  cedars  were 
valued  on  account  of  their  lofty  and  luxuriant  growth,  and  the 
durability  of  their  wood.  The  predicate,  "which  Jehovah  hath 
planted,"  corresponds,  so  far  as  the  actual  meaning  is  concerned,  to 
^!^  Y^!,  "  by  water ; "  for  this  was  "  an  expression  used  to  designate 
trees  that,  on  account  of  their  peculiar  excellence,  were  superior  to 
ordinary  trees ^  (Calvin;  cf.  Ps.  civ.  16). — Yer.  7.  And  not  only 
its  dwellings,  but  Israel  itself  would  also  prosper  abundantly.  It 
would  have  an  abundance  of  water,  that  leading  source  of  all  bless- 
ing and  prosperity  in  the  burning  East.  The  nation  is  personified 
as  a  man  carrying  two  pails  overflowing  with  water.  VpT  is  the 
dual  t)''^,7'j.     The  dual  is  generally  used  in  connection  with  objects 


CHAP.  XXIV.  1-9.      .  189 

which  are  arranged  in  pairs,  either  naturally  or  artificially  (Ges.  § 
88,  2).  "ffis  seed^^  {i.e.  his  posterity,  not  his  sowing  corn,  the 
introduction  of  which,  in  this  connection,  would,  to  say  the  least, 
be  very  feeble  here)  "  w,"  i.e.  grows  up,  "  hy  many  waters,^^  that  is 
to  say,  enjoys  the  richest  blessings  (comp.  Deut.  viii.  7  and  xi.  10 
with  Isa.  xliv.  4,  Ixv.  23).  ^'^I  (optative),  "  Ms  king  he  high  before 
(higher  than)  Agag."  Agag  {}y^,  the  fiery)  is  not  the  proper  name 
of  the  Amalekite  king  defeated  by  Saul  (1  Sam.  xv.  8),  but  the 
title  {iiomen  dignitatis)  of  the  Amalekite  kings  in  general,  just  as 
all  the  Egyptian  kings  had  the  common  name  of  Pharaoh,  and  the 
Philistine  kings  the  name  of  Ahimelech}  The  reason  for  mention- 
ing the  king  of  the  Amalekites  was,  that  he  was  selected  as  the  im- 
personation of  the  enmity  of  the  world  against  the  kingdom  of  God, 
which  culminated  in  the  kings  of  the  heathen;  the  Amalekites 
having  been  the  first  heathen  tribe  that  attacked  the  Israelites  on 
their  journey  to  Canaan  (Ex.  xvii.  8).  The  introduction  of  one 
particular  king  would  have  been  neither  in  keeping  with  the  con- 
text, nor  reconcilable  with  the  general  character  of  Balaam's  utter-, 
ances.  Both  before  and  afterward,  Balaam  predicts  in  great  general 
outlines  the  good  that  would  come  to  Israel ;  and  how  is  it  likely 
that  he  would  suddenly  break  off  in  the  midst  to  compare  the  king- 
dom of  Israel  with  the  greatness  of  one  particular  king  of  the 
Amalekites  ?  Even  his  fourth  and  last  prophecy  merely  announces 
in  great  general  terms  the  destruction  of  the  different  nations  that 
rose  up  in  hostility  against  Israel,  without  entering  into  special 
details,  which,  like  the  conquest  of  the  Amalekites  by  Saul,  had  no 
material  or  permanent  influence  upon  the  attitude  of  the  heathen 
towards  the  people  of  God ;  for  after  the  defeat  inflicted  upon  this 
tribe  by  Saul,  they  very  speedily  invaded  the  Israelitish  territory 
again,  and  proceeded  to  plunder  and  lay  it  waste  in  just  the  same 

1  See  Hengstenherg  (Dissertations,  ii.  250 ;  and  Balaam,  p.  458).  Even 
Gesenius  could  not  help  expressing  some  doubt  about  there  being  any  reference 
in  this  prophecy  to  the  event  described  in  1  Sam.  xv.  8  sqq.,  "  unless,"  he  says, 
"  you  suppose  the  name  Agag  to  have  been  a  name  that  was  common  to  the 
kings  of  the  Amalekites  "  (thes.  p.  19).  He  also  points  to  the  name  AbimelecTi^ 
of  which  he  says  (p.  9)  :  "It  was  the  name  of  several  kings  in  the  land  of  the 
Philistines,  as  of  the  king  of  Gerar  in  the  times  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xx.  2,  3, 
xxi.  22,  23),  and  of  Isaac  (Gen.  xxvi.  1,  2),  and  also  of  the  king  of  Gathin  the 
time  of  David  (Ps.  xxxiv.  1 ;  coU.  1  Sam.  xxi.  10,  where  the  same  king  is 
called  AcJiish).  It  seems  to  have  been  the  common  name  and  title  of  those 
kings,  as  Pharaoh  was  of  the  early  kings  of  Egypt,  and  Caesar  and  Augustus  of 
the  emperors  of  Rome." 


190  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


manner  as  before  (cf.  1  Sam.  xxvii.  8,  xxx.  1  sqq. ;  2  Sam.  vili. 
12).^  in^'^j  his  king,  is  not  any  one  particular  king  of  Israel,  but 
quite  generally  the  king  whom  the  Israelites  would  afterwards 
receive.  For  i3?p  is  substantially  the  same  as  the  parallel  ^^^f^, 
the  kingdom  of  Israel,  which  had  already  been  promised  to  the 
patriarchs  (Gen.  xvii.  6,  xxxv.  11),  and  in  which  the  Israelites 
were  first  of  all  to  obtain  that  full  development  of  power  which  cor- 
responded to  its  divine  appointment ;  just  as,  in  fact,  the  development 
of  any  people  generally  culminates  in  an  organized  kingdom. — The 
king  of  Israel,  whose  greatness  was  celebrated  by  Balaam,  was 
therefore  neither  the  Messiah  exclusively,  nor  the  earthly  kingdom 
without  the  Messiah,  but  the  kingdom  of  Israel  that  was  established  by 
David,  and  was  exalted  in  the  Messiah  into  an  everlasting  kingdom, 
the  enemies  of  which  would  all  be  made  its  footstool  (Ps.  ii.  and  ex.). 
In  vers.  8  and  9,  Balaam  proclaims  still  further :  "  God  leads  him 
out  of  Egypt ;  his  strength  is  as  that  of  a  buffalo:  he  will  devour  w\ 
nations  his  enemies^  and  crush  their  hones,  and  dash  them  in  pieces 
with  his  arrows.  He  has  encamped,  he  lies  down  like  a  lion,  and  like 
a  lioness :  xoho  can  drive  him  up?  Blessed  be  they  who  bless  thee,  and 
cursed  they  who  curse  thee!  "  The  fulness  of  power  that  dwelt  in 
the  people  of  Israel  was  apparent  in  the  force  and  prowess  with 
which  their  God  brought  them  out  of  Egypt.  This  fact  Balaam 
repeats  from  the  previous  saying  (chap,  xxiii.  22),  for  the  purpose 
of  linking  on  to  it  the  still  further  announcement  of  the  manner  in 
which  the  power  of  the  nation  would  show  itself  upon  its  foes  in 
time  to  come.  The  words,  "  he  will  devour  nations,"  call  up  the 
image  of  a  lion,  which  is  employed  in  ver.  9  to  depict  the  indomi- 
table heroic  power  of  Israel,  in  words  taken  from  Jacob's  blessing 
in  Gen.  xlix.  9.  The  Piel  D"]!!  is  a  denom,  verb  from  Q'^ji,  with  the 
meaning  to  destroy,  crush  the  bones,  like  ^^,  to  root  out  (cf.  Ges, 
§  52,  2 ;  Ewald,  §  120,  e.).  VJfn  is  not  the  object  to  ynr^] ;  for  THD, 
to  dash  to  pieces,  does  not  apply  to  arrows,  which  may  be  broken  in 
pieces,  but  not  dashed  to  pieces ;  and  the  singular  suffix  in  V^n  can 
only  apply  to  the  singular  idea  in  the  verse,  i.e.  to  Israel,  and  not  to 

^  Even  on  the  supposition  (which  is  quite  at  variance  with  the  character  of 
all  the  prophecies  of  Balaam)  that  in  the  name  of  Agag,  the  contemporary  of 
Saul,  we  have  a  vaticinium  ex  eventii^  the  allusion  to  this  particular  king  would 
be  exceedingly  strange,  as  the  Amalekites  did  not  perform  any  prominent  part 
among  the  enemies  of  Israel  in  the  time  of  Saul ;  and  the  command  to  extermi- 
nate them  was  given  to  Saul,  not  because  of  any  special  harm  that  they  had  done 
to  Israel  at  that  time,  but  on  account  of  what  they  had  done  to  Israel  on  their 
way  out  of  Egypt  (comp.  1  Sam.  xv.  2  with  Ex.  xvii.  8). 


CHAP.  XXIV.  15-24.  191 

its  enemies,  who  are  spoken  of  in  the  plural.  Arroics  are  singled 
out  as  representing  weapons  in  general.^  Balaam  closes  this  utter- 
ance, as  he  had  done  the  previous  one,  with  a  quotation  from  Jacob's 
blessing,  which  he  introduces  to  show  to  Balak,  that,  according  to 
words  addressed  by  Jehovah  to  the  Israelites  through  their  own 
tribe-father,  they  were  to  overcome  their  foes  so  thoroughly,  that 
none  of  them  should  venture  to  rise  up  against  them  again.  To  this 
he  also  links  on  the  word  with  which  Isaac  had  transferred  to  Jacob 
in  Gen.  xx^ai.  29  the  blessing  of  Abraham  in  Gen.  xii.  3,  for  the 
purpose  of  warning  Balak  to  desist  from  his  enmity  against  the 
chosen  people  of  God. 

Yers.  10-14.  This  repeated  blessing  of  Israel  threw  Balak  into 
such  a  violent  rage,  that  he  smote  his  hands  together,  and  advised 
Balaam  to  fly  to  his  house :  adding,  "  /  said,  I  will  honour  thee 
greatly  (cf.  xxii.  17  and  37) ;  huty  behold,  Jehovah  has  kept  thee 
back  from  honour ^  "Smiting  the  hands  together"  was  either  a 
sign  of  horror  (Lam.  ii.  15)  or  of  violent  rage ;  it  is  in  the  latter 
sense  that  it  occurs  both  here  and  in  Job  xxvii.  33.  In  the  words, 
"  Jehovah  hath  kept  thee  back  from  honour,"  the  irony  with  which 
Balak  scoffs  at  Balaam's  confidence  in  Jehovah  is  unmistakeable. 
— ^Ver.  12.  But  Balaam  reminds  him,  on  the  other  hand,  of  the 
declaration  which  he  made  to  the  messengers  at  the  very  outset 
(chap.  xxii.  18),  that  he  could  not  on  any  account  speak  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  command  of  Jehovah,  and  then  adds,  "  Arid  now,  behold, 
I  go  to  my  people.  Come,  I  will  tell  thee  advisedly  what  this  people 
will  do  to  thy  people  at  the  end  of  the  days  J*  KVJ?  to  advise ;  here  it 
denotes  an  announcement,  which  includes  advice.  The  announce- 
ment of  what  Israel  would  do  to  the  Moabites  in  the  future,  con- 
tains the  advice  to  Balak,  what  attitude  he  should  assume  towards 
Israel,  if  this  people  was  to  bring  a  blessing  upon  his  own  people 
and  not  a  curse.     On  "  the  end  of  the  days,^^  see  at  Gen.  xlix.  1. 

Vers.  15-24.  Balaam's /owr^/i  and  last  prophecy  is  distinguished 
from  the  previous  ones  by  the  fact  that,  according  to  the  announce- 
ment in  ver.  14,  it  is  occupied  exclusively  with  the  future,  and 
foretells  the  victorious  supremacy  of  Israel  over  all  its  foes,  and  the 

^  The  difficulty  which  many  feel  in  connection  with  the  word  V3f n  cannot  be 
removed  by  alterations  of  the  text.  The  only  possible  conjecture  V!k*Sn  (his 
loins)  is  wrecked  upon  the  singular  suffix,  for  the  dashing  to  pieces  of  the  loins 
of  Israel  is  not  for  a  moment  to  be  thought  of.  KnoheVs  proposal,  viz.  to  read 
VDp,  has  no  support  in  Deut.  xxxiii.  11,  and  is  much  too  violent  to  reckon  upon 
any  approval. 


192  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


destruction  of  all  the  powers  of  the  world.  This  prophecy  is  divided 
into  four  different  prophecies  by  the  fourfold  repetition  of  the 
words,  "  he  took  up  his  parable"  (vers.  15,  20,  21,  and  23).  The 
first  of  these  refers  to  the  two  nations  that  were  related  to  Israel, 
viz.  Edom  and  Moab  (vers.  17—19);  the  second  to  Amalek,  the  ■■ 
arch-enemy  of  Israel  (ver.  20)  ;  the  third  to  the  Kenites,  who  were^J 
allied  to  Israel  (vers.  21  and  22);  and  the  fourth  proclaims  the 
overthrow  of  the  great  powers  of  the  world  (vers.  23  and  24). — The 
introduction  in  vers.  15  and  16  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  previous 
prophecy  in  vers.  3  and  4,  except  that  the  words,  "  he  which  knew 
the  knowledge  of  the  Most  Higlij^  are  added  to  the  expression,  " he 
that  heard  the  words  of  God^^  to  show  that  Balaam  possessed  the 
knowledge  of  the  Most  High,  i.e,  that  the  word  of  God  about  to  be 
announced  had  already  been  communicated  to  him,  and  was  not 
made  known  to  him  now  for  the  first  time ;  though  without  imply- 
ing that  he  had  received  the  divine  revelation  about  to  be  uttered 
at  the  same  time  as  those  which  he  had  uttered  before. — ^Ver.  17. 
The  prophecy  itself  commences  with  a  picture  from  the  "  end  of 
the  days,'*  which  rises  up  before  the  mental  eye  of  the  seer.  "  / 
see  Him,  yet  not  now ;  I  behold  Him,  but  not  nigh,  A  star  appears 
out  of  Jacob,  and  a  sceptre  rises  out  of  Israel,  and  dashes  Moab  in 
pieces  on  both  sides,  and  destroys  all  the  sons  of  confusion^  The 
suffixes  to  ^3K"iK  and  ^3"J3^^  refer  to  the  star  which  is  mentioned 
afterwards,  and  which  Balaam  sees  in  spirit,  but  "  not  now,"  i.e. 
not  as  having  already  appeared,  and  "  not  nigh,"  i.e.  not  to  appear 
immediately,  but  to  come  forth  out  of  Israel  in  the  far  distant 
future.  "  A  star  is  so  natural  an  image  and  symbol  of  imperial 
greatness  and  splendour,  that  it  has  been  employed  in  this  sense  in 
almost  every  nation.  And  the  fact  that  this  figure  and  symbol  are 
so  natural,  may  serve  to  explain  the  belief  of  the  ancient  world,  that 
the  birth  and  accession  of  great  kings  was  announced  by  the  ap- 
pearance of  stars"  {Hengstenberg,  Vfh.o  cites  Justini  hist,  xxxvii.  2  ; 
Plinii  h.  n.  ii.  23 ;  Sueton.  Jul.  Cces.  c.  78 ;  and  Dio  Cass.  xlv.  p. 
273).  If,  however,  there  could  be  any  doubt  that  the  rising  star 
represented  the  appearance  of  a  glorious  ruler  or  king,  it  would  be 
entirely  removed  by  the  parallel,  "  a  sceptre  arises  out  of  Israel." 
The  sceptre,  which  was  introduced  as  a  symbol  of  dominion  even 
in  Jacob's  blessing  (Gen.  xhx.  10),  is  employed  here  as  the  figura- 
tive representation  and  symbol  of  the  future  ruler  in  Israel.  This 
ruler  would  destroy  all  the  enemies  of  Israel.  Moab  and  (ver.  18) 
£Jdom  are  the  first  of  these  that  are  mentioned,  viz.  the  two  nations 


CHAP.  XXIV.  15-24.  193 

that  were  related  to  Israel  by  descent,  but  had  risen  up  in  hostility 
against  it  at  that  time.  Moab  stands  in  the  foremost  rank,  not 
merely  because  Balaam  was  about  to  announce  to  the  king  of  Moab 
what  Israel  would  do  to  his  people  in  the  future,  but  also  because 
the  hostility  of  the  heathen  to  the  people  of  God  had  appeared 
most  strongly  in  Balak's  desire  to  curse  the  Israelites.  2KiD  ''(^KQ, 
"  the  two  corners  or  sides  of  Moab,"  equivalent  to  Moab  on  both 
sides,  from  one  end  to  the  other.  For  "ii?1i^,  the  inf.  Pilp.  of  n^ip  or 
"i^i?,  the  meaning  to  destroy  is  fully  established  by  the  parallel  J^nD, 
and  by  Isa.  xxii.  5,  whatever  may  be  thought  of  its  etymology  and 
primary  meaning.  And  neither  the  Samaritan  text  nor  the  passage 
in  Isaiah  (xlviii.  45),  which  is  based  upon  this  prophecy,  at  all  war- 
rants an  alteration  of  the  reading  ")i^"}P  into  Iplj^  (the  crown  of  the 
head),  since  Jeremiah  almost  invariably  uses  earlier  writings  in  this 
free  manner,  viz.  by  altering  the  expressions  employed,  and  substi- 
tuting in  the  place  of  unusual  words  either  more  common  ones,  or 
such  as  are  similar  in  sound  (cf.  Kilper,  Jerem.  libror.  ss.  interpres 
atque  vindex,  pp.  xiii.  sqq.  and  p.  43). — riE^''JH"73  does  not  mean 
"  all  the  sons  of  Seth,^  i.e.  all  mankind,  as  the  human  race  is  never 
called  by  the  name  of  Seth ;  and  the  idea  that  the  ruler  to  arise  out 
of  Israel  would  destroy  all  men,  would  be  altogether  unsuitable.  It 
signifies  rather  "  all  the  sons  of  confusion"  by  which,  according  to 
the  analogy  of  Jacob  and  Israel  (ver.  17),  Edom  and  Seir  (ver.  18), 
the  Moabites  are  to  be  understood  as  being  men  of  wild,  warlike 
confusion,  rit^  is  a  contraction  of  T[\^'^  (Lam.  iii.  47),  and  derived 
from  T\,\^^ ;  and  in  Jer.  xlviii.  45  it  is  correctly  rendered  jiXC^  -J^.^ 

In  the  announcement  of  destruction  which  is  to  fall  upon  the 
enemies  of  Israel  through  the  star  and  sceptre  out  of  the  midst  of 

^  On  the  other  hand,  the  rendering,  "  all  the  sons  of  the  drinker,  i.e.  of  Lot," 
which  Hiller  proposed,  and  v.  Hofmann  and  Kurtz  have  renewed,  is  evidently 
untenable.  For,  in  the  first  place,  the  fact  related  in  Gen.  xix.  32  sqq.  does 
not  warrant  the  assumption  that  Lot  ever  received  the  name  of  the  "  drinker," 
especially  as  the  word  used  in  Gen.  xix.  is  not  riDC',  but  r\p^.  Moreover,  the 
allusion  to  "  all  the  sons  of  Lot,"  i.e.  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites,  neither  suits 
the  thoroughly  synonymous  parallelism  in  the  saying  of  Balaam,  nor  corresponds 
to  the  general  character  of  his  prophecies,  which  announced  destruction  pri- 
marily only  to  those  nations  that  rose  up  in  hostility  against  Israel,  viz.  Moab, 
Edom,  and  Amalek,  whereas  hitherto  the  Ammonites  had  not  assumed  either  a 
hostile  or  friendly  attitude  towards  them.  And  lastly,  all  the  nations  doomed 
to  destruction  are  mentioned  by  name.  Now  the  Ammonites  were  not  a  branch 
of  the  Moabites  by  descent,  nor  was  their  territory  enclosed  within  the  Moab- 
itish  territory,  so  that  it  could  be  included,  as  Hofmann  supposes,  within  the 
"  four  corners  of  Moab." 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  jj 


194  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

it,  Moab  is  followed  by  "  its  southern  neighbour  Edom." — Ver.  18. 
'^And  Edom  becomes  a  possession,  and  Seir  becomes  a  possession,  its 
enemies  ;  but  Israel  acquires  power^  Whose  possession  Edom  and 
Seir  are  to  become,  is  not  expressly  stated  ;  but  it  is  evident  from  the 
context,  and  from  VJ^X  (its  enemies),  which  is  not  a  genitive  depen- 
dent upon  Seir,  but  is  in  apposition  to  Edom  and  Seir,  just  as  V'J^ 
in  ver.  8  is  in  apposition  to  2)15.  Edom  and  Seir  were  his,  i.e. 
Israel's  enemies  ;  therefore  they  were  to  be  taken  by  the  ruler  who 
was  to  arise  out  of  Israel.  Edom  is  the  name  of  the  people,  Seir 
of  the  country,  just  as  in  Gen.  xxxii.  4 ;  so  that  Seir  is  not  to  be 
understood  as  relating  to  the  prae-Edomitish  population  of  the  land, 
which  had  been  subjugated  by  the  descendants  of  Esau,  and  had 
lost  all  its  independence  a  long  time  before.  In  Moses'  days  the 
Israelites  were  not  allowed  to  fight  with  the  Edomites,  even  when 
they  refused  to  allow  them  to  pass  peaceably  through  their  territory 
(see  chap.  xx.  21),  but  were  commanded  to  leave  them  in  their 
possessions  as  a  brother  nation  (Deut.  ii.  4,  5).  In  the  future,  how- 
ever, their  relation  to  one  another  was  to  be  a  very  different  one ; 
because  the  hostility  of  Edom,  already  in  existence,  grew  more  and 
more  into  obstinate  and  daring  enmity,  which  broke  up  all  the  ties 
of  affection  that  Israel  was  to  regard  as  holy,  and  thus  brought 
about  the  destruction  of  the  Edomites. — The  fulfilment  of  this 
prophecy  commenced  with  the  subjugation  of  the  Edomites  by 
David  (2  Sam.  viii.  14 ;  1  Kings  xi.  15, 16 ;  1  Chron.  xviii.  12, 13), 
but  it  will  not  be  completed  till  "  the  end  of  the  days,"  when  all 
the  enemies  of  God  and  His  Church  will  be  made  the  footstool  of 
Christ  (Ps.  ex.  1  sqq.).  That  David  did  not  complete  the  subjuga- 
tion of  Edom  is  evident,  on  the  one  hand,  from  the  fact  that  the 
Edomites  revolted  again  under  Solomon,  though  without  success 
(1  Kings  xi.  14  sqq.) ;  that  they  shook  off  the  yoke  imposed  upon 
them  under  Joram  (2  Kings  viii.  20)  ;  and  notwithstanding  their 
defeat  by  Amaziah  (2  Kings  xiv.  7  ;  2  Chron.  xxv.  11)  and  Uzziah 
(2  Kings  xiv.  22 ;  2  Chron.  xxvi.  2),  invaded  Judah  a  second  time 
under  Ahaz  (2  Chron.  xxviii.  17),  and  afterwards  availed  them- 
selves of  every  opportunity  to  manifest  their  hostility  to  the  king- 
dom of  Judah  and  the  Jews  generally, — as  for  example  at  the 
conquest  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Chaldeans  (Ezek.  xxxv.  15,  xxxvi.  5  ; 
Obad.  10  and  13),  and  in  the  wars  between  the  Maccabees  and 
the  Syrians  (1  Mace.  v.  3,  65  ;  2  Mace.  x.  15,  xii.  38  sqq.), — until 
they  wxre  eventually  conquered  by  John  Ilyrcanus  in  the  year  B.C. 
129,  and  compelled  to  submit  to  circumcision,  and  incorporated  in 


I 


CHAP.  XXIV.  15-24.  195 

the  Jewish  state  (Josephus,  Ant.  xiii.  9,  1,  xv.  7,  9  ;  Wars  of  the 
Jews,  iv.  5,  5).  But  notwithstanding  this,  they  got  the  government 
over  the  Jews  into  their  own  hands  through  Antipater  and  Herod 
(Josephus,  Ant.  xiv.  8,  5),  and  only  disappeared  from  the  stage  of 
history  with  the  destruction  of  the  Jewish  state  by  the  Romans. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  declarations  of  the  prophets  (Amos  ix.  12  ; 
Obad.  17  sqq.),  which  foretell,  with  an  unmistakeable  allusion  to 
this  prophecy,  the  possession  of  the  remnant  of  Edom  by  the  king- 
dom of  Israel,  and  the  announcements  in  Isa.  xxxiv.  and  Ixiii.  1-6, 
Jer.  xlix.  7  sqq.,  Ezek.  xxv.  12  sqq.  and  35,  corap.  with  Ps.  cxxxvii. 
7  and  Lam.  iv.  21,  22,  prove  still  more  clearly  that  Edom,  as  the 
leading  foe  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  will  only  be  utterly  destroyed 
when  the  victory  of  the  latter  over  the  hostile  power  of  the  world 
has  been  fully  and  finally  secured. — Whilst  Edom  falls,  Israel  will 
acquire  power,  ^^n  nb^y^  to  acquire  ability  or  power  (Deut.  viii. 
17,  18  ;  Ruth  iv.  11),  not  merely  to  show  itself  brave  or  strong.  It 
is  rendered  correctly  by  OnJcelos,  '^  prosperahitur  in  opibus ;"  and 
Jonathan,  '^  prcevalebunt  in  opibus  et  possidebunt  eosJ^ — Ver.  19. 
''And  a  ruler  shall  come  out  of  Jacob,  and  destroy/  what  is  left  out 
of  cities."  The  subject  to  "HI"!  is  indefinite,  and  to  be  supplied  from 
the  verb  itself.  We  have  to  think  of  the  ruler  foretold  as  star  and 
sceptre.  The  abbreviated  form  T}'!]  is  not  used  for  the  future  n^"!^^ 
but  is  jussive  in  its  force.  One  out  of  Jacob  shall  rule.  '^^V'O  is 
employed  in  a  collected  and  general  sense,  as  in  Ps.  Ixxii.  16.  Out 
of  every  city  in  which  there  is  a  remnant  of  Edom,  it  shall  be 
destroyed,  n^nb'  is  equivalent  to  Dinx  n^KK?  (Amos  ix.  12).  The 
explanation,  "  destroy  the  remnant  out  of  the  city,  namely,  out  of 
the  holy  city  of  Jerusalem"  (Ewald  and  Baur),  is  forced,  and  can- 
not be  sustained  from  the  parallelism. 

Ver.  20.  The  second  saying  in  this  prophecy  relates  to  the 
Amalehites.  Balaam  sees  them,  not  with  the  eyes  of  his  body,  but 
in  a  state  of  ecstasy,  like  the  star  out  of  Jacob.  "  Beginning  of  the 
heathen  is  Amaleh,  and  its  end  is  destruction^  Amalek  is  called  the 
beginning  of  the  nations,  not  "as  belonging  to  the  most  distinguished 
and  foremost  of  the  nations  in  age,  power,  and  celebrity  "  (Knobel), 
— for  in  all  these  respects  this  Bedouin  tribe,  which  descended  from 
a  grandson  of  Esau,  was  surpassed  by  many  other  nations, — but  as 
the  first  heathen  nation  which  opened  the  conflict  of  the  heathen 
nations  against  Israel  as  the  people  of  God  (see  at  Ex.  xvii.  8  sqq.). 
As  its  beginning  had  been  enmity  against  Israel,  its  end  would  be 
"  even  to  the  perishing "  ("tjiJ^  ""^y),  i.e.  reaching  the  position  of  one 


196  THE  FOUKTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


who  was  perishing,  falling  into  destruction,  which  commenced  under 
Saul  and  was  completed  under  Hezekiah  (see  vol.  i.  p.  324). 

Vers.  21  and  22.  The  third  saying  relates  to  the  Kenites,  whose 
origin  is  involved  in  obscurity  (see  at  Gen.  xv.  19),  as  there  are  no 
other  Kenites  mentioned  in  the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament,  with 
the  exception  of  Gen.  xv.  19,  than  the  Kenites  who  went  to  Canaan 
with  Hobab  the  brother-in-law  of  Moses  (chap.  x.  29  sqq.:  see  Judg.^l 
i.  16,  iv.  11  ;  1  Sam.  xv.  6,  xxvii.  10,  xxx.  29) ;  so  that  there  are^" 
not  sufficient  grounds  for  the  distinction  between  Canaanitish  and 
Midianitish  Kenites,  as  Michcelis,  Hengstenberg,  and  others  suppose.  J I 
The  hypothesis  that  Balaam  is  speaking  of  Canaanitish  Kenites,  or  ■■ 
of  the  Kenites  as  representatives  of  the  Canaanites,  is  as  unfounded 
as  the  hypothesis  that  by  the  Kenites  we  are  to  understand  the 
Midianites,  or  that  the  Kenites  mentioned  here  and  in  Gen.  xv.  19 
are  a  branch  of  the  supposed  aboriginal  Amalekites  (Ewald).  The 
saying  concerning  the  Kenites  runs  thus :  "  Durable  is  thy  dwelling- 
place^  and  thy  nest  laid  upon  the  rock ;  for  should  Kain  be  destroyed 
until  Asshiir  shall  carry  thee  captive?''  This  saying  "applies  to 
friends  and  not  to  foes  of  Israel "  (v,  Hofmanri),  so  that  it  is  per- 
fectly applicable  to  the  Kenites,  who  were  friendly  with  Israel. 
The  antithetical  association  of  the  Amalekites  and  Kenites  answers 
perfectly  to  the  attitude  assumed  at  Horeb  towards  Israel,  on  the 
one  hand  by  the  Amalekites,  and  on  the  other  hand  by  the 
Kenites,  in  the  person  of  Jethro  the  leader  of  their  tribe  (see  Ex. 
xvii.  8  sqq.,  xviii.,  and  vol.  ii.  p.  83).  The  dwelling-place  of  the 
Kenites  was  of  lasting  duration,  because  its  nest  was  laid  upon  a 
rock  (D"'EJ^  is  a  passive  participle,  as  in  2  Sam.  xiii.  32,  and  Obad.  4). 
This  description  of  the  dwelling-place  of  the  Kenites  cannot  be 
taken  literally,  because  it  cannot  be  shown  that  either  the  Kenites 
or  the  Midianites  dwelt  in  inaccessible  mountains,  as  the  Edomites 
are  said  to  have  done  in  Obad.  3,  4;  Jer.  xlix.  16.  The  words  are 
to  be  interpreted  figuratively,  and  in  all  probability  the  figure  is 
taken  from  the  rocky  mountains  of  Horeb,  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  which  the  Kenites  led  a  nomade  life  before  their  association 
with  Israel  (see  at  Ex.  iii.  1).  As  v.  Hofmann  correctly  observes : 
"  Kain,  which  had  left  its  inaccessible  mountain  home  in  Horeb, 
enclosed  as  it  was  by  the  desert,  to  join  a  people  who  were  only 
wandering  in  search  of  a  home,  by  that  very  act  really  placed  its 
rest  upon  a  still  safer  rock."  This  is  sustained  in  ver.  22  by  the 
statement  that  Kain  would  not  be  given  up  to  destruction  till  Asshur 
carried  it  away  into  captivity.   DK  '•3  does  not  mean  ^'  nevertheless." 


'  CHAP.  XXIV.  15-24.  197 

It  signifies  ''unless^^  after  a  negative  clause,  whether  the  nega- 
tion be  expressed  directly  by  ^p,  or  indirectly  by  a  question ;  and 
^'  onli/"  where  it  is  not  preceded  by  either  a  direct  or  an  indirect 
negation,  as  in  Gen.  xl.  14;  Job  xlii.  8.  The  latter  meaning, 
however,  is  not  applicable  here,  because  it  is  unsuitable  to  the  *^^~^V 
(until)  which  follows.  Consequently  Qi;?  can  only  be  understood  in 
the  sense  of  "is  it  that,"  as  in  1  Kings  i.  27,  Isa.  xxix.  16,  Job 
xxxi.  16,  etc.,  and  as  introducing  an  indirect  query  in  a  negative 
sense :  "  For  is  it  (the  case)  that  Kain  shall  fall  into  destruction 
until  .  .  .  ?" — equivalent  to  "Kain  shall  not  be  exterminated  until 
Asshur  shall  carry  him  away  into  captivity;"  Kain  will  only  be 
overthrown  by  the  Assyrian  imperial  power.  Kain,  the  tribe-father, 
is  used  poetically  for  the  Kenite,  the  tribe  of  which  he  was  the 
founder.  1V3,  to  exterminate,  the  sense  in  which  it  frequently 
occurs,  as  in  Deut.  xiii.  6,  xvii.  7,  etc.  (cf.  2  Sam.  iv.  11 ;  1  Kings 
xxii.  47). — For  the  fulfilment  of  this  prophecy  we  are  not  to  look 
merely  to  the  fact  that  one  branch  of  the  Kenites,  which  separated 
itself,  according  to  Judg.  iv.  11,  from  its  comrades  in  the  south  of 
Judah,  and  settled  in  Naphtali  near  Kadesh,  was  probably  carried 
away  into  captivity  by  Tiglath-Pileser  along  with  the  population  of 
Galilee  (2  Kings  xv.  29) ;  but  the  name  Asshur,  as  the  name  of 
the  first  great  kingdom  of  the  world,  which  rose  up  from  the  east 
against  the  theocracy,  is  employed,  as  we  may  clearly  see  from  ver. 
24,  to  designate  all  the  powers  of  the  world  which  took  their  rise 
in  Asshur,  and  proceeded  forth  from  it  (see  also  Ezra  vi.  22,  where 
the  Persian  king  is  still  called  king  of  AssJmr  or  Assyria).  Balaam 
did  not  foretell  that  this  worldly  power  would  oppress  Israel  also, 
and  lead  it  into  captivity,  because  the  oppression  of  the  Israelites 
was  simply  a  transitory  judgment,  which  served  to  refine  the  nation 
of  God  and  not  to  destroy  it,  and  which  was  even  appointed  accord- 
ing to  the  counsel  of  God  to  open  and  prepare  the  way  for  the 
conquest  of  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  by  the  kingdom  of  God. 
To  the  Kenites  only  did  the  captivity  become  a  judgment  of 
destruction ;  because,  although  on  terms  of  friendship  with  the 
people  of  Israel,  and  outwardly  associated  with  them,  yet,  as  is 
clearly  shown  by  1  Sam.  xv.  6,  they  never  entered  inwardly  into 
fellowship  with  Israel  and  Jehovah's  covenant  of  grace,  but  sought 
to  maintain  their  own  independence  side  by  side  with  Israel,  and 
thus  forfeited  the  blessing  of  God  which  rested  upon  Israel.^ 

^  This  simple  but  historically  established  interpretation  completely  removes 
the  objection,  "  that  Balaam  could  no  more  foretell  destruction  to  the  friends  of 


198  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


Vers.  23,  24.  The  fourth  saying  applies  to  Asshur,  and  is  intro- 
duced by  an  exclamation  of  woe  :  "  Woe  !  wJio  will  live,  when  God 
sets  this  !  And  ships  (come)  from  the  side  of  Chittim,  and  press 
Asshur,  and  press  Eber,  and  he  also  perishes r  The  words  "  Woe, 
who  will  live/'  point  to  the  fearfulness  of  the  following  judgment, 
which  went  deep  to  the  heart  of  the  seer,  because  it  would  fall 
upon  the  sons  of  his  own  people  (see  at  chap.  xxii.  5).  The  mean- 
ing is,  "  Who  will  preserve  his  life  in  the  universal  catastrophe  that 
is  coming?"  {Hengstenherg,)  i^tS'P,  either  "since  the  setting  of  it," 
equivalent  to  "  from  the  time  when  God  sets  (determines)  this 
(prav  6fi  ravTa  6  0eo9,  quando  faciei  ista  Deus ;  LXX.,  Vulg.),  o 
*^  on  account  of  the  setting  of  it,"  i.e,  because  God  determines  this 
D'JB^,  to  set,  applied  to  that  which  God  establishes,  ordains,  or  bring 
to  pass,  as  in  Isa.  xliv.  7  ;  Hab.  i.  12.  The  suffix  in  )^'^^  is  not  to 
be  referred  to  Asshur,  as  Knohel  supposes,  because  the  prophecy 
relates  not  to  Asshur  "  as  the  mighty  power  by  which  everything 
was  crushed  and  overthrown,"  but  to  a  power  that  would  come 
from  the  far  west  and  crush  Asshur  itself.  The  suffix  refers  rather 
to  the  substance  of  the  prophecy  that  follows,  and  is  to  be  under- 
stood in  a  neuter  sense.  ?^  is  "God,"  and  not  an  abbreviation 
of  npNIj  which  is  always  written  with  the  article  in  the  Pentateuch 
(^^C?  Gen.  xix.  8,  25,  xxvi.  3,  4;  Lev.  xviii.  27;  Deut.  iv.  42, 
vii.  22,  xix.  11),  and  only  occurs  once  without  the  article,  viz.  in 
1  Ohron.  xx.  8.  Q^^,  from  ^^  (Isa.  xxxiii.  21),  signifies  ships,  like 
C^  in  the  passage  in  Dan.  xi.  30,  which  is  founded  upon  the  pro- 
phecy before  us.  ^1^,  from  the  side,  as  in  Ex.  ii.  5,  Deut.  ii.  37, 
etc.  D^J|13  is  Cyprus  with  the  capital  Citium  (see  at  Gen.  x.  4), 
which  is  mentioned  as  intervening  between  Greece  and  Phoenicia, 
and  the  principal  station  for  the  maritime  commerce  of  Phoenicia, 
so  that  all  the  fleets  passing  from  the  west  to  the  east  necessarily 
took  Cyprus  in  their  way  (Isa.  xxiii.  1).  The  nations  that  would 
come  across  the  sea  from  the  side  of  Cyprus  to  humble  Asshur, 
are  not  mentioned  by  name,  because  this  lay  beyond  the  range  of 
Balaam's  vision.  He  simply  gives  utterance  to  the  thought,  "  A 
power  comes  from  Chittim  over  the  sea,  to  which  Asshur  and  Eber, 
the  eastern  and  the  western  Shem,  will  both  succumb  "  (v.  Hofmami), 
Eber  neither  refers  to  the  Israelites  merely  as  Hebrews  (LXX., 

Israel  than  to  Israel  itself,"  by  which  Kurtz  would  preclude  the  attempt  to 
refer  this  prophecy  to  the  Kenites,  who  were  in  alliance  with  Israel.  His  further 
objections  to  v.  Hofmann's  view  are  either  inconclusive,  or  at  any  rate  do  not 
affect  the  explanation  that  we  have  given. 


I 


I 


CHAP.  XXIV.  15-24.  199 

Vulg,),  nor  to  the  races  beyond  the  Euphrates,  as  Onkelos  and  others 
suppose,  but,  like  "all  the  sons  of  Eber"  in  Gen.  x.  21,  to  the 
posterity  of  Abraham  who  descended  from  Eber  through  Peleg,  and 
also  to  the  descendants  of  Eber  through  Joktan :  so  that  Asshur, 
as  the  representative  of  the  Shemites  who  dwelt  in  the  far  east, 
included  Elam  within  itself ;  whilst  Eber,  on  the  other  hand,  repre- 
sented the  western  Shemites,  the  peoples  that  sprang  from  Arphaxad, 
Lud,  and  Aram  (Gen.  x.  21).  "  And  he  also  shall  perish  for  euer:" 
these  words  cannot  relate  to  Asshur  and  Eber,  for  their  fate  is 
already  announced  in  the  word  ^^V  (afflict,  press),  but  only  to  the 
new  western  power  that  was  to  come  over  the  sea,  and  to  which  the 
others  were  to  succumb.  "  Whatever  powers  might  rise  up  in  the 
world  of  peoples,  the  heathen  prophet  of  Jehovah  sees  them  all  fall, 
one  through  another,  and  one  after  another;  for  at  last  he  loses 
in  the  distance  the  power  to  discern  whence  it  is  that  the  last  which, 
he  sees  rise  up  is  to  receive  its  fatal  blow  "  (v.  Ilofmami,  p.  520). 
The  overthrow  of  this  last  power  of  the  world,  concerning  which 
the  prophet  Daniel  was  the  first  to  receive  and  proclaim  new  reve- 
lations, belongs  to  "  the  end  of  the  days,"  in  which  the  star  out 
of  Jacob  is  to  rise  upon  Israel  as  a  "bright  morning  star"  (Rev. 
xxii.  16). 

Now  if  according  to  this  the  fact  is  firmly  established,  that  in  this 
last  prophecy  of  Balaam,  "  the  judgment  of  history  even  upon  the 
imperial  powers  of  the  West,  and  the  final  victory  of  the  King  of 
the  kingdom  of  God  were  proclaimed,  though  in  fading  outlines, 
more  than  a  thousand  years  before  the  events  themselves,"  as 
Tholuch  has  expressed  it  in  his  Propheten  und  ihre  Weissagung ;  the 
announcement  of  the  star  out  of  Jacob,  and  the  sceptre  out  of 
Israel,  i.e.  of  the  King  and  Ruler  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  who  was 
to  dash  Moab  to  pieces  and  take  possession  of  Edom,  cannot  have 
received  its  complete  fulfilment  in  the  victories  of  David  over  these 
enemies  of  Israel ;  but  will  only  be  fully  accomplished  in  the  future 
overthrow  of  all  the  enemies  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  By  the  "  end 
of  days,"  both  here  and  everywhere  else,  we  are  to  understand  the 
Messianic  era,  and  that  not  merely  at  its  commencement,  but  in  its 
entire  development,  until  the  final  completion  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  at  the  return  of  our  Lord  to  judgment.  In  the  "  star  out  of 
Jacob,"  Balaam  beholds  not  David  as  the  one  king  of  Israel,  but 
the  Messiah,  in  whom  the  royalty  of  Israel  promised  to  the  patriarchs 
(Gen.  xvii.  6,  16,  xxxv.  11)  attains  its  fullest  realization.  The  star 
and   sceptre   are   symbols   not   of   "  Israel's  royalty  personified " 


200  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


(Hengstenherg),  but  of  the  real  King  in  a  concrete  form,  as  He  was 
to  arise  out  of  Israel  at  a  future  day.  It  is  true  that  Israel  received 
the  promised  King  in  David,  who  conquered  and  subjugated  the 
Moabites,  Edomites,  and  other  neighbouring  nations  that  were 
hostile  to  Israel.  But  in  the  person  of  David  and  his  rule  the 
kingly  government  of  Israel  was  only  realized  in  its  first  and  imper- 
fect beginnings.  Its  completion  was  not  attained  till  the  coming 
of  the  second  David  (Hos.  iii.  5 ;  Jer.  xxx.  9  ;  Ezek.  xxxiv.  24, 
xxxvii.  24,  25),  the  Messiah  Himself,  who  breaks  in  pieces  all  the 
enemies  of  Israel,  and  founds  an  everlasting  kingdom,  to  which  all 
the  kingdoms  and  powers  of  this  world  are  to  be  brought  into 
subjection  (2  Sam  vii.  12-16  ;  Ps.  ii.,  Ixxii.,  and  cx.).^ 

If,  however,  the  star  out  of  Jacob  first  rose  upon  the  world  in 
Christ,  the  star  which  showed  the  wise  men  from  the  east  the  w^ay 
to  the  new-born  "  King  of  the  Jews,"  and  went  before  them,  till 
it  stood  above  the  manger  at  Bethlehem  (Matt.  ii.  1-11),  is  inti- 
mately related  to  our  prophecy.  Only  we  must  not  understand  the 
allusion  as  being  so  direct,  that  Balaam  beheld  the  very  star  which 
appeared  to  the  wise  men,  and  made  known  to  them  the  birth  of  the 
Saviour  of  the  world.  The  star  of  the  wise  men  was  rather  an 
embodiment  of  the  star  seen  by  Balaam,  which  announced  to  them 
the  fulfilment  of  Balaam's  prophecy, — a  visible  sign  by  which  God 
revealed  to  them  the  fact,  that  the  appearance  of  the  star  which 

^  The  application  of  the  star  out  of  Jacob  to  the  Messiah  is  to  be  found  even 
in  Onkelos ;  and  this  interpretation  was  so  widely  spread  among  the  Jews,  that 
the  pseudo-Messiah  who  arose  under  Hadrian,  and  whom  even  it.  Akiha  acknow- 
ledged, took  the  name  of  Bar  Cochha  (son  of  a  star),  in  consequence  of  this 
prophecy,  from  which  the  nickname  of  Bar  Coziba  (son  of  a  lie)  was  afterwards 
formed,  when  he  had  submitted  to  the  Romans,  with  all  his  followers.  In  the 
Christian  Church  also  the  Messianic  explanation  was  the  prevalent  one,  from  the 
time  of  Justin  and  Irenxus  onwards  (see  the  proofs  in  Calovii  Bihl.  ad  7i.  Z.), 
although,  according  to  a  remark  of  Tlieodoret  (qu.  44  ad  Num.),  there  were  some 
who  did  not  adopt  it.  The  exclusive  application  of  the  passage  to  David  was  so 
warmly  defended,  first  of  all  by  Grotius,  and  still  more  by  Verschuir,  that  even 
Hengstenherg  and  Tholuck  gave  up  the  Messianic  interpretation.  But  they  both 
of  them  came  back  to  it  afterwards,  the  former  in  his  "  Balaam  "  and  the  second 
edition  of  his  Christology,  and  the  latter  in  his  treatise  on  "  the  Prophets."  At 
the  present  time  the  Messianic  character  of  the  prophecy  is  denied  by  none  but 
the  supporters  of  the  more  vulgar  rationalism,  such  as  Knobel  and  others ; 
whereas  G.  Baur  (in  his  History  of  Old  Testament  Prophecy)  has  no  doubt  that 
the  prediction  of  the  star  out  of  Jacob  points  to  the  exalted  and  glorious  King, 
filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  whom  Isaiah  (ch.  ix.  5,  xi.  1  sqq.)  and  Micah  (v.  2) 
expected  as  the  royal  founder  of  the  theocracy.  Reinke  gives  a  complete  history 
of  the  interpretation  of  this  passage  in  his  Beitrage^  iv.  186  sqq. 


1 


CHAP.  XXIV.  15-24.  201 

Balaam  beheld  in  the  far  distant  future  had  been  realized  at  Beth- 
lehem in  the  birth  of  Christ,  the  King  of  the  Jews. — The  "  wise 
men  from  the  east,"  who  had  been  made  acquainted  with  the 
revelations  of  God  to  Israel  by  the  Jews  of  the  diaspora^  might 
feel  themselves  specially  attracted  in  their  search  for  the  salva- 
tion of  the  world  by  the  predictions  of  Balaam,  from  the  fact 
that  this  seer  belonged  to  their  own  country,  and  came  "  out  of  the 
mountains  of  the  east "  (ch.  xxiii.  7)  ;  so  that  they  made  his  say- 
ings the  centre  of  their  expectations  of  salvation,  and  were  also 
conducted  through  them  to  the  Saviour  of  all  nations  by  means  of 
supernatural  illumination.  "  God  unfolded  to  their  minds,  which 
were  already  filled  with  a  longing  for  the  '  star  out  of  Jacob ' 
foretold  by  Balaam,  the  meaning  of  the  star  which  proclaimed  the 
fulfilment  of  Balaam's  prophecy ;  He  revealed  to  them,  that  is  to  say, 
the  fact  that  it  announced  the  birth  of  the  ^  King  of  the  Jews.' 
And  just  as  Balaam  had  joyously  exclaimed,  '  I  see  Him,'  and 
'  I  behold  Him,'  they  also  could  say,  '  We  have  seen  His  star'" 
{Hengstenherg). 

If,  in  conclusion,  we  compare  Balaam's  prophecy  of  the  star 
that  would  come  out  of  Jacob,  and  the  sceptre  that  would  rise  out 
of  Israel,  with  the  prediction  of  the  patriarch  Jacob,  of  the  sceptre 
that  should  not  depart  from  Judah,  till  the  Shiloh  came  whom  the 
nations  would  obey  (Gen.  xlix.  10),  it  is  easy  to  observe  that  Balaam 
not  only  foretold  more  clearly  the  attitude  of  Israel  to  the  nations 
of  the  world,  and  the  victory  of  the  kingdom  of  God  over  every 
hostile  kingdom  of  the  world ;  but  that  he  also  proclaimed  the 
Bringer  of  Peace  expected  by  Jacob  at  the  end  of  the  days  to  be  a 
mighty  ruler,  whose  sceptre  would  break  in  pieces  and  destroy  all 
the  enemies  of  the  nation  of  God.  The  tribes  of  Israel  stood  before 
the  mental  eye  of  the  patriarch  in  their  full  development  into  the 
nation  in  which  all  the  famiHes  of  the  earth  were  to  be  blessed. 
From  this  point  of  view,  the  salvation  that  was  to  blossom  in  the 
future  for  the  children  of  Israel  culminated  in  the  peaceful  king- 
dom of  the  Shiloh,  in  whom  the  dominion  of  the  victorious  lion 
out  of  Judah  was  to  attain  its  fullest  perfection.  But  the  eye  of 
Balaam,  the  seer,  which  had  been  opened  by  the  Spirit  of  God, 
beheld  the  nation  of  Israel  encamped,  according  to  its  tribes,  in  the 
face  of  its  foes,  the  nations  of  this  world.  They  were  endeavour- 
ing to  destroy  Israel ;  but  according  to  the  counsel  of  the  Almighty 
God  and  Lord  of  the  whole  world,  in  their  warfare  against  the 
nation  that  was  blessed  of  Jehovah,  they  were  to  succumb  one  after 


202  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  other,  and  be  destroyed  by  the  king  that  was  to  arise  out  of 
Israel.  This  determinate  counsel  of  the  living  God  was  to  be 
proclaimed  by  Balaam,  the  heathen  seer  out  of  Mesopotamia  the 
centre  of  the  national  development  of  the  ancient  world  :  and,  first 
of  all,  to  the  existing  representatives  of  the  nations  of  the  world 
that  were  hostile  to  Israel,  that  they  might  see  what  would  at  all 
times  tend  to  their  peace — might  see,  that  is  to  say,  that  in  their 
hostility  to  Israel  they  were  rebelling  against  the  Almighty  God  of 
heaven  and  earth,  and  that  they  would  assuredly  perish  in  the  con- 
flict, since  life  and  salvation  were  only  to  be  found  with  the  people 
of  Israel,  whom  God  had  blessed.  And  even  though  Balaam  had 
to  make  known  the  purpose  of  the  Lord  concerning  His  people 
primarily,  and  in  fact  solely,  to  the  Moabites  and  their  neighbours, 
who  were  like-minded  with  them,  his  announcement  was  also  in- 
tended for  Israel  itself,  and  was  to  be  a  pledge  to  the  congregation 
of  Israel  for  all  time  of  the  certain  fulfilment  of  the  promises  of 
God  ;  and  so  to  fill  them  with  strength  and  courage,  that  in  all  their 
conflicts  with  the  powers  of  this  world,  they  should  rely  upon  the 
Lord  their  God  with  the  firmest  confidence  of  faith,  should  strive 
with  unswerving  fidelity  after  the  end  of  their  divine  calling,  and 
should  build  up  the  kingdom  of  God  on  earth,  which  is  to  outlast 
all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world. — In  what  manner  the  Israelites  be- 
came  acquainted  with  the  prophecies  of  Balaam,  so  that  Moses 
could  incorporate  them  into  the  TJioraJi,  we  are  nowhere  told,  but 
we  can  infer  it  with  tolerable  certainty  from  the  subsequent  fate  of 
Balaam  himself. 

Ver.  25.  At  the  close  of  this  announcement  Balaam  and  Balak 
departed  from  one  another.  "  Balaam  rose  up,  and  went  and  turned 
towards  his  place^^  (i.e.  set  out  on  the  way  to  his  house) ;  "  and  king 
Balak  also  went  his  wayJ^  ^^>V?  ^"^  does  not  mean,  "  he  returned 
to  his  place,"  into  his  home  beyond  the  Euphrates  (equivalent  to 
iDpp"7&^  nb^^),  but  merely  "  he  turned  towards  his  place"  (both  here 
and  in  Gen.  xviii.  33).  That  he  really  returned  home,  is  not  implied 
in  the  words  themselves ;  and  the  question,  whether  he  did  so,  must 
be  determined  from  other  circumstances.  In  the  further  course  of 
the  history,  we  learn  that  Balaam  went  to  the  Midianites,  and  ad- 
vised them  to  seduce  the  Israelites  to  unfaithfulness  to  Jehovah, 
by  tempting  them  to  join  in  the  worship  of  Peor  (chap.  xxxi.  16). 
He  was  still  with  them  at  the  time  when  the  Israelites  engaged  in 
the  war  of  vengeance  against  that  people,  and  was  slain  by  the 
Israelites  along  with  the  five  princes  of  jMidian  (chap.  xxxi.  8 ; 


CHAP.  XXV.  1-5.  203 

Josh.  xiii.  22).  At  the  time  when  he  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Israelites,  he  no  doubt  made  a  full  communication  to  the  Israelitish 
general,  or  to  Phinehas,  who  accompanied  the  army  as  priest,  con- 
cerning his  blessings  and  prophecies,  probably  in  the  hope  of  saving 
his  life  ;  though  he  failed  to  accomplish  his  end.^ 

WHOREDOM  OF  ISRAEL,  AND  ZEAL  OF  PHINEHAS. — CHAP.  XXV. 

Vers.  1-5.  The  Lord  had  defended  His  people  Israel  from 
Balaam's  curse ;  but  the  Israelites  themselves,  instead  of  keeping 
the  covenant  of  their  God,  fell  into  the  snares  of  heathen  seduc- 
tion (vers.  1,  2).  Whilst  encamped  at  Shittim,  in  the  steppes  of 
Moab,  the  people  began  to  commit  whoredom  with  the  daughters  of 
Moab :  they  accepted  the  invitations  of  the  latter  to  a  sacrificial 
festival  of  their  gods,  took  part  in  their  sacrificial  meals,  and  even 
worshipped  the  gods  of  the  Moabites,  and  indulged  in  the  licentious 
worship  of  Baal-Peor.  As  the  princes  of  Midian,  who  were  allied 
to  Moab,  had  been  the  advisers  and  assistants  of  the  Moabitisli  king 
in  the  attempt  to  destroy  the  Israelites  by  a  curse  of  God ;  so  now, 
after  the  failure  of  that  plan,  they  were  the  soul  of  the  new  under- 
taking to  weaken  Israel  and  render  it  harmless,  by  seducing  it  to 
idolatry,  and  thus  leading  it  into  apostasy  from  its  God.  But  it  was 
Balaam,  as  is  afterwards  casually  observed  in  chap.  xxxi.  16,  who 
first  of  all  gave  this  advice.  This  is  passed  over  here,  because  the 
point  of  chief  importance  in  relation  to  the  object  of  the  narrative, 
was  not  Balaam's  share  in  the  proposal,  but  the  carrying  out  of  the 
proposal  itself.  The  daughters  of  Moab,  however,  also  took  part  in 
carrying  it  out,  by  forming  friendly  associations  with  the  Israelites, 
and  then  inviting  them  to  their  sacrificial  festival.  They  only  are 
mentioned  in  vers.  1,  2,  as  being  the  daughters  of  the  land.  The 
participation  of  the  Midianites  appears  first  of  all  in  the  shameless 
licentiousness  of  Cozhi,  the  daughter  of  the  Midianitish  prince,  from 
which  we  not  only  see  that  the  princes  of  Midian  performed  their 

^  It  is  possible,  however,  as  Hengstenherg  imagines,  that  after  Balaam's  de- 
parture from  Balak,  he  took  his  way  into  the  camp  of  the  Israelites,  and  there 
made  known  his  prophecies  to  Moses  or  to  the  elders  of  Israel,  in  the  hope  of 
obtaining  from  them  the  reward  which  Balak  had  withheld,  and  that  it  was  not 
till  after  his  failure  to  obtain  full  satisfaction  to  his  ambition  and  covetousness 
here,  that  he  went  to  the  Midianites,  to  avenge  himself  upon  the  Israelites,  by 
the  proposals  that  he  made  to  them.  The  objections  made  by  Kurtz  to  this 
conjecture  arc  not  strong  enough  to  prove  that  it  is  inadmissible,  though  the 
possibility  of  the  thing  does  not  involve  cither  its  probability  or  its  certainty. 


204  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

part,  but  obtain  an  explanation  of  the  reason  wliy  the  judgment 
upon  the  crafty  destroyers  of  Israel  was  to  be  executed  upon  the 
Midianites.^  SJdttim,  an  abbreviation  of  Ahel-Shittim  (see  at  chap, 
xxii.  1),  to  which  the  camp  of  the  Israehtes  in  the  steppes  of  Moab 
reached  (chap,  xxxiii.  49),  is  mentioned  here  instead  of  Arboth- 
Moab,  because  it  was  at  this  northern  point  of  the  camp  that  the 
Israelites  came  into  contact  with  the  Moabites,  and  that  the  latter 
invited  them  to  take  part  in  their  sacrificial  meals ;  and  in  Josh.  ii.  1 
and  iii.  1,  because  it  was  from  this  spot  that  the  Israelites  com- 
menced the  journey  to  Canaan,  as  being  the  nearest  to  the  place 
where  they  w^ere  to  pass  through  the  Jordan.  n:r,  construed  with 
7^,  as  in  Ezek.  xvi.  28,  signifies  to  incline  to  a  person,  to  attach 
one's  self  to  him,  so  as  to  commit  fornication.  The  word  applies  to 
carnal  and  spiritual  whoredom.  Thelttet  of  the  flesh  induced  the 
Israelites  to  approach  the  daughters  of  Moab,  and  form  acquaint- 
ances and  friendships  with  them,  in  consequence  of  which  they  were 
invited  by  them  "  to  the  slain-offerings  of  their  gods,"  i.e.  to  the 
sacrificial  festivals  and  sacrificial  meals,  in  connection  with  which 
they  also  "  adored  their  gods,"  Le.  took  part  in  the  idolatrous  worship 
connected  with  the  sacrificial  festival.  These  sacrificial  meals  were 
celebrated  in  honour  of  the  Moabitish  god  Baal-Peor,  so  that  the 
Israelites  joined  themselves  to  him.  I^V,  in  the  Niphal,  to  bind 
one's  self  to  a  person.  Baal-Peor  is  the  Baal  of  Peor,  who  was 
worshipped  in  the  city  of  Beth-Peor  (Deut.  iii.  29,  iv.  46  ;  see  at 
chap,  xxiii.  28),  a  Moabitish  Priapus,  in  honour  of  whom  women 
and  virgins  prostituted  themselves.  As  the  god  of  war,  he  was  called 
Chemosh  (see  at  chap.  xxi.  29). — Yers.  3-5.  And  the  anger  of  the 
Lord  burned  against  the  people,  so  that  Jehovah  commanded  Moses 
to  fetch  the  heads  of  the  people,  i.e,  to  assemble  them  together,  and 
to  "hangup"  the  men  who  had  joined  themselves  ^to  Baal-Peor 
"  before  the  Lord  against  the  sun,"  that  the  anger  of  God  might 
turn  away  from  Israel.  The  burning  of  the  wrath  of  God,  which 
was  to  be  turned  away  from  the  people  by  the  punishment  of  the 

^  Consequently  there  is  no  discrepancy  between  vers.  1-5  and  6-18,  to  war- 
rant the  violent  hypothesis  of  Knohel^  that  there  are  two  different  accounts 
mixed  together  in  this  chapter, — an  Elohistic  account  in  vers.  6-18,  of  which 
the  commencement  has  been  dropped,  and  a  Jehovistic  account  in  vers.  1-5,  of 
•which  the  latter  part  has  been  cut  off.  The  particular  points  adduced  in  proof 
of  this  fall  to  the  ground,  when  the  history  is  correctly  explained ;  and  such 
assertions  as  these,  that  the  name  Shittim  and  the  allusion  to  the  judges  in 
ver.  5,  and  to  the  wrath  of  Jehovah  in  vers.  3  and  4,  are  foreign  to  the  Elohist, 
are  not  proofs,  but  empty  assumptions. 


CHAP.  XXV.  6-9.  205 

guilty,  as  enjoined  upon  Moses,  consisted,  as  we  may  see  from  vers. 
8,  9,  in  a  plague  inflicted  upon  the  nation,  which  carried  off  a  great 
number  of  the  people,  a  sudden  death,  as  in  chap.  xiv.  37,  xvii.  11. 
V''ipin,  from  VP^,  to  be  torn  apart  or  torn  away  (Ges.,  Winer)^  refers 
to  the  punishment  of  crucifixion,  a  mode  of  capital  punishment 
which  was  adopted  by  most  of  the  nations  of  antiquity  (see  Winer, 
bihl.  B.  W.  i.  p.  680),  and  was  carried  out  sometimes  by  driving  a 
stake  into  the  body,  and  so  impaling  them  (avao-KoXoTTL^eti/),  the 
mode  practised  by  the  Assyrians  and  Persians  (^Herod,  iii.  159,  and 
LayarcVs  Nineveh  and  its  Remains,  vol.  ii.  p.  374,  and  plate  on 
p.  369),  at  other  times  by  fastening  them  to  a  stake  or  nailing  them 
to  a  cross  (dvaaravpovv).  In  the  instance  before  us,  however,  the 
idolaters  were  not  impaled  or  crucified  alive,  but,  as  we  may  see 
from  the  word  I2"}n  in  ver.  5,  and  in  accordance  with  the  custom 
frequently  adopted  by  other  nations  (see  Herzog^s  Encyclopaedia), 
they  were  first  of  all  put  to  death,  and  then  impaled  upon  a  stake 
or  fastened  upon  a  cross,  so  that  the  impaling  or  crucifixion  was 
only  an  aggravation  of  the  capital  punishment,  like  the  burning  in 
Lev.  XX.  14,  and  the  hanging  (p^^)  in  Deut.  xxi.  22.  The  render- 
ing adopted  by  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  is  TrapaBei/y/jLaTL^etv,  sus~ 
pendere,  in  this  passage,  and  in  2  Sam.  xxi.  6,  9,  i^rjXcd^eLv  (to 
expose  to  the  sun),  and  crucijigere.  ^ji^Y,  for  Jehovah,  as  satisfac- 
tion for  Him,  i.e.  to  appease  His  wrath.  DHiK  (them)  does  not 
refer  to  the  heads  of  the  nation,  but  to  the  guilty  persons,  upon 
whom  the  heads  of  the  nation  were  to  pronounce  sentence. — Ver.  5. 
The  judges  were  to  put  to  death  every  one  his  men,  i,e.  such  of  the 
evil-doers  as  belonged  to  his  forum,  according  to  the  judicial 
arrangements  instituted  in  Ex.  xviii.  This  command  of  Moses  to 
the  judges  was  not  carried  out,  however,  because  the  matter  took  a 
different  turn. 

Vers.  6-9.  Whilst  the  heads  of  the  people  were  deliberating  on 
the  subject,  and  the  whole  congregation  was  assembled  before  the 
tabernacle,  weeping  on  account  of  the  divine  wrath,  there  came  an 
Israelite,  a  prince  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  who  brought  a  Midian- 
itish  woman,  the  daughter  of  a  Midianitish  chief  (ver.  14),  to  his 
brethren,  i.e,  into  the  camp  of  the  Israelites,  before  the  eyes  of 
Moses  and  all  the  congregation,  to  commit  adultery  with  her  in  his 
tent.  This  shameless  wickedness,  in  which  the .  depth  of  the  cor- 
ruption that  had  penetrated  into  the  congregation  came  to  light, 
inflamed  the  zeal  of  PJmiehas,  the  son  of  Eleazar  the  high  priest,  to 
such  an  extent,  that  he  seized  a  spear,  and  rushing  into  the  tent  of 


206  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  adulterer,  pierced  both  of  them  through  in  the  very  act.  "^^pn, 
liL  the  arched,  or  arch,  is  appHed  here  to  the  inner  or  hinder  division 
of  the  tent,  the  sleeping-room  and  women's  room  in  the  larger  tents 
of  the  upper  classes. — Vers.  8,  9.  Through  this  judgment,  which 
was  executed  by  Phinehas  with  holy  zeal  upon  the  daring  sinners, 
the  plague  was  restrained,  so  that  it  came  to  an  end.  The  example 
which  Phinehas  had  made  of  these  sinners  was  an  act  of  interces- 
sion, by  w^hich  the  high  priest  appeased  the  wrath  of  God,  and 
averted  the  judgment  of  destruction  from  the  whole  congregation 
("  he  was  zealous  for  his  God,"  '^3?!'!l,  ver.  13).  The  thought  upon 
which  this  expression  is  founded  is,  that  the  punishment  which 
was  inflicted  as  a  purifying  chastisement  served  as  a  "  covering " 
against  the  exterminating  judgment  (see  Herzogs  Cyclopaedia).^ — 
Yerl  9.  Twenty-four  thousand  men  were  killed  by  this  plague. 
The  Apostle  Paul  deviates  from  this  statement  in  1  Cor.  x.  8,  and 
gives  the  number  of  those  that  fell  as  twenty-three  thousand,  pro- 
bably from  a  traditional  interpretation  of  the  schools  of  the  scribes, 
according  to  which  a  thousand  were  deducted  from  the  twenty-four 
thousand  who  perished,  as  being  the  number  of  those  who  were 
hanged  by  the  judges,  so  that  only  twenty-three  thousand  would  be 
killed  by  the  plague ;  and  it  is  to  these  alone  that  Paul  refers. 

Vers.  10-15.  For  this  act  of  divine  zeal  the  eternal  possession 
of  the  priesthood  was  promised  to  Phinehas  and  his  posterity  as 
Jehovah's  covenant  of  peace.  i^?P^,  by  displaying  my  zeal  in  the 
midst  of  them  (viz.  the  Israehtes).  ^0??i?  is  not  "  zeal  for  me,"  but 
"  my  zeal,"  the  zeal  of  Jehovah  with  which  Phinehas  was  filled, 
and  impelled  to  put  the  daring  sinners  to  death.  By  doing  this 
he  had  averted  destruction  from  the  Israelites,  and  restrained  the 
working  of  Jehovah's  zeal,  which  had  manifested  itself  in  the 
plague.  ''  I  gave  him  my  covenant  of  peace^^  (the  suffix  is  attached 
to  the  governing  noun,  as  in  Lev.  vi.  3).  n""")!  |n3,  as  in  Gen.  xvii. 
2,  to  give,  Le,  to  fulfil  the  covenant,  to  grant  what  was  promised  in 
the  covenant.  The  covenant  granted  to  Phinehas  consisted  in  the 
fact,  that  an  "eternal  priesthood"  (i.e.  the  eternal  possession  of  the 

^  Upon  this  act  of  Phinehas,  and  the  similar  examples  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  xv. 
33)  and  Mattathias  (1  Mace.  ii.  24),  the  later  Jews  erected  the  so-called  "  zealot 
right,"  jiLS  zelotarum,  according  to  which  any  one,  even  though  not  qualified  by 
his  official  position,  possessed  the  right,  in  cases  of  any  daring  contempt  of  the 
theocratic  institutions,  or  any  daring  violation  of  the  honour  of  God,  to  proceed 
with  vengeance  against  the  criminals.  (See  Salden^  otia  iheol.  pp.  609  sqq.,  and 
Buddem^  de  jure  zelotarum  apud  Heir.  1699,  and  in  Oelrich/s  collect.  T.  i.  Diss. 
6.)     The  stoning  of  Stephen  furnishes  an  example  of  this. 


I 
I 

I 


CHAP.  XXVI.  207 

priesthood)  was  secured  to  him,  not  for  himself  alone,  but  for  his 
descendants  also,  as  a  covenant,  i.e.  in  a  covenant,  or  irrevocable 
form,  since  God  never  breaks  a  covenant  that  He  has  made.  In 
accordance  with  this  promise,  the  high-priesthood  which  passed 
from  Eleazar  to  Phinehas  ( Judg.  xx.  28)  continued  in  his  family, 
with  the  exception  of  a  brief  interruption  in  Eli's  days  (see  at  1 
Sam.  i.-iii.  and  xiv.  3),  until  the  time  of  the  last  gradual  dissolu- 
tion of  the  Jewish  state  through  the  tyranny  of  Herod  and  his 
successors  (see  my  Archdologie,  §  38). — In  vers.  14,  15,  the  names 
of  the  two  daring  sinners  are  given.  The  father  of  Cozbi,  the 
]Midianitish  princess,  was  named  Zur,  and  is  described  here  as 
"  head  of  the  tribes  (^^^^5,  See  at  Gen.  xxv.  16)  of  a  father's  house 
in  Midian,"  i.e.  as  the  head  of  several  of  the  Midianitish  tribes  that 
were  descended  from  one  tribe-father ;  in  chap.  xxxi.  8,  however, 
he  is  described  as  a  king,  and  classed  among  the  five  kings  of 
Midian  who  were  slain  by  the  Israelites. 

Vers.  16-18.  The  Lord  now  commanded  Moses  to  show  hos- 
tility {T}^)  to  the  Midianites,  and  smite  them,  on  account  of  the 
stratagem  which  they  had  practised  upon  the  Israelites  by  tempting 
them  to  idolatry,  "in  order  that  the  practical  zeal  of  Phinehas 
against  sin,  by  which  expiation  had  been  made  for  the  guilt,  might 
be  adopted  by  all  the  nation"  (Baumgarten).  The  inf.  ahs.  ")i"iV, 
instead  of  the  imperative^  as  in  Ex.  xx.  8,  etc.  'S  "^^I'^V,  in  con- 
sideration of  Peor,  and  indeed,  or  especially,  in  consideration  of 
Cozhi.  The  repetition  is  emphatic.  The  wickedness  of  the  Midian- 
ites culminated  in  the  shameless  wantonness  of  Cozbi  the  Midian- 
itish princess.  "  Their  sister"  i.e.  one  of  the  members  of  their 
tribe. — The  19th  verse  belongs  to  the  following  chapter,  and  forms 
the  introduction  to  chap.  xxvi.  1.^ 

MUSTERING  OF  ISRA.EL  IN  THE  STEPPES  OF  MOAB. — CHAP.  XXVI. 

Before  taking  vengeance  upon  the  Midianites,  as  they  had 
been  commanded,  the  Israelites  were  to  be  mustered  as  the  army  of 
Jehovah,  by  means  of  a  fresh  numbering,  since  the  generation  that 
was  mustered  at  Sinai  (chap,  i.-iv.)  had  died  out  in  the  wilderness, 
with  the  sole  exception  of  Caleb  and  Joshua  (vers.  64,  65).  On 
this  ground  the  command  of  God  was  issued,  "  after  the  plague," 
for  a  fresh  census  and  muster.  For  with  the  plague  the  last  of 
those  who  came  out  of  Egypt,  and  were  not  to  enter  Canaan,  had 
1  In  the  English  version  this  division  is  adopted. — Tr. 


208  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

been  swept  away,  and  thus  the  sentence  had  been  completely  exe- 
cuted.— The  object  of  the  fresh  numbering,  however,  was  not 
merely  to  muster  Israel  for  the  war  with  the  Midianites,  and  in  the 
approaching  conquest  of  the  promised  land  with  the  Canaanites 
also,  but  was  intended  to  serve  at  the  same  time  as  a  preparation  for 
their  settlement  in  Canaan,  viz.  for  the ,  division  of  the  conquered 
land  among  the  tribes  and  families  of  Israel.  For  this  reason 
(chap,  xxvi.)  the  families  of  the  different  tribes  are  enumerated 
here,  which  w^as  not  the  case  in  chap.  i. ;  and  general  instructions 
are  also  given  in  vers.  52-56,  with  reference  to  the  division  of 
Canaan. — The  numbering  was  simply  extended,  as  before,  to  the 
male  population  of  the  age  of  20  years  and  upwards,  and  was  no 
doubt  carried  out,  like  the  previous  census  at  Sinai,  by  Moses  and 
the  high  priest  (Eleazar),  with  the  assistance  of  the  heads  of  the 
tribes,  although  the  latter  are  not  expressly  mentioned  here. — The 
names  of  the  families  correspond — ^with  very  few  exceptions,  which 
have  been  already  noticed  in  vol.  i.  pp.  372-3 — to  the  grandsons  and 
great-grandsons  of  Jacob  mentioned  in  Gen.  xlvi. — With  regard  to 
the  total  number  of  the  people,  and  the  number  of  the  different 
tribes,  compare  the  remarks  at  pp.  4  sqq. 

Vers.  1-51.  Mustering  of  the  Twelve  Tribes. — Vers.  1-4. 
The  command  of  God  to  Moses  and  Eleazar  is  the  same  as  in  chap, 
i.,  ii.,  and  iii.,  except  that  it  does  not  enter  so  much  into  details. 
— Ver.  3.  "  And  Moses  and  Eleazar  the  priest  spake  with  them " 
(pT\  with  the  accusative,  as  in  Gen.  xxxvii.  4).  The  pronoun 
refers  to  "  the  children  of  Israel,"  or  more  correctly,  to  the  heads 
of  the  nation  as  the  representatives  of  the  congregation,  who  were 
to  carry  out  the  numbering.  On  the  Arboth-Moab,  see  at  chap, 
xxii.  1.  Only  the  leading  point  in  their  words  is  mentioned,  viz. 
"  from  twenty  years  old  and  upwards  "  (so.  shall  ye  take  the  num- 
ber of  the  children  of  Israel),  since  it  was  very  simple  to  supply 
the  words  "take  the  sum"  from  ver.  2} — The  words  from  "the 

*  This  is,  at  all  events,  easier  and  simpler  than  the  alterations  of  the  text 
which  have  been  suggested  for  the  purpose  of  removing  the  difficulty.  Knohel 
proposes  to  alter  "ini^l  into  n3*l*"i,  and  lirDi^h  into  ^psh  -  "  Moses  and  Eleazar 
arranged  the  children  of  Israel  when  they  mustered  them."  But  1"';iin  does 
not  mean  to  arrange,  but  simply  to  drive  in  pairs,  to  subjugate  (Ps.  xviii.  48, 
and  xlvii.  4), — an  expression  which,  as  must  be  immediately  apparent,  is  alto- 
gether inapplicable  to  the  arrangement  of  the  people  in  families  for  the  purpose 
of  taking  a  census. 


I 


CHAP  XXVI.  1-51.  209 

children  of  Israel "  in  ver.  4  onwards  form  the  introduction  to  the 
enumeration  of  the  different  tribes  (vers.  5  sqq.),  and  the  verb  l''n^ 
(were)  must  be  suppHed.  "  And  the  children  of  Israel,  who  went 
forth  out  of  Egypt,  were  Reuben"  etc. — ^Vers.  5-11.  The  famiHes 
of  Reuben  tally  with  Gen.  xlvi.  9,  Ex.  vi.  14,  and  1  Chron.  v.  3. 
The  plural  ^^.^  (sons),  in  ver.  8,  where  only  one  son  is  mentioned,  is 
to  be  explained  from  the  fact,  that  several  sons  of  this  particular 
son  {i.e.  grandsons)  are  mentioned  afterwards.  On  Dathan  and 
Abiram,  see  at  chap.  xvi.  1  and  32  sqq.  See  also  the  remark  made 
here  in  vers.  10b  and  11,  viz.  that  those  who  were  destroyed  with 
the  company  of  Korah  were  for  a  sign  (Dp,  here  a  warning)  ;  but 
that  the  sons  of  Korah  were  not  destroyed  along  with  their  father. 
— Vers.  12-14.  The  Simeonites  counted  only  five  families,  as  Ohad 
(Gen.  xlvi.  10)  left  no  family.  Nemuel  is  called  Jemuel  there,  as 
yod  and  nun  are  often  interchanged  (cf.  Ges.  thes.  pp.  833  and 
557)  ;  and  Zerach  is  another  name  of  the  same  signification  for 
Zohar  {Zerach,  the  rising  of  the  sun ;  Zohar,  candor,  splendour). — 
Vers.  15-18.  The  Gadites  are  the  same  as  in  Gen.  xlvi.  16,  except 
that  Ozni  is  called  Ezbon  there. — Vers.  19-22.  The  sons  and 
families  of  Judah  agree  with  Gen.  xlvi.  12  (cf.  Gen.  xxxviii.  6 
sqq.)  ;  also  with  1  Chron.  ii.  3-5. — Vers.  23-25.  The  families  of 
Issachar  correspond  to  the  sons  mentioned  in  Gen.  xlvi.  13,  except 
that  the  name  Job  occurs  there  instead  of  Jashub.  The  two  names 
have  the  same  signification,  as  Job  is  derived  from  an  Arabic  word 
which  signifies  to  return. — ^Vers.  26  and  27.  The  families  of 
Zebulun  correspond  to  the  sons  named  in  Gen.  xlvi.  14. — Vers. 
28-37.  The  descendants  of  Joseph  were  classified  in  two  leading 
families,  according  to  his  two  sons  Manasseh  and  Ephraim,  who 
were  born  before  the  removal  of  Israel  to  Egypt,  and  were  raised 
into  founders  of  tribes  in  consequence  of  the  patriarch  Israel 
having  adopted  them  as  his  own  sons  (Gen.  xlviii.). — ^Vers.  29-34. 
Eight  families  descended  from  Manasseh :  viz.  one  from  his  son 
Machir,  the  second  from  Machir's  son  or  Manasseh's  grandson 
Gilead,  and  the  other  six  from  the  six  sons  of  Gilead.  The  genea- 
logical accounts  in  chap,  xxvii.  1,  xxxvi.  1,  and  Josh.  xvii.  1  sqq., 
fully  harmonize  with  this,  except  that  lezer  (ver.  30)  is  called 
Abiezer  in  Josh.  xvii.  2 ;  whereas  only  a  part  of  the  names  men- 
tioned here  occur  in  the  genealogical  fragments  in  1  Chron. 
ii.  21—24,  and  vii.  14-29.  In  ver.  33,  a  son  of  Hepher,  named 
Zelophehad,  is  mentioned.  He  had  no  sons,  but  only  daughters, 
whose  names  are  given  here  to   prepare   the  way  for  the  legal 

TEXT. — VOL.  III.  O 


210  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


n 


regulations  mentioned  in  chap,  xxvii.  and  xxxvi.,  to  which  this  fact 
gave  rise. — Vers.  35-37.  There  were  four  families  descended  from 
Ephraim ;  three  from  his  sons,  and  one  from  his  grandson.  Of 
the  descendants  of  Sutelah  several  successive  links  are  given  infll 
1  Chron.  vii.  20  sqq. — Yers.  38-41,  The  children  of  Benjamiti^- 
formed  seven  families,  five  of  whom  were  founded  by  his  sons,  and 
two  by  grandsons.  (On  the  differences  which  occur  between  the 
names  given  here  and  those  in  Gen.  xlvi.  21,  see  vol.  i.  pp.  372, 
373.)  Some  of  the  sons  and  grandsons  of  Benjamin  mentioned 
here  are  also  found  in  the  genealogical  fragments  in  1  Chron. 
vii.  6-18,  and  viii.  1  sqq. — Vers.  42  and  43.  The  descendants  of 
Dan  formed  only  one  family,  named  from  a  son  of  Dan,  who  is 
called  Shuham  here,  but  Hushim  in  Gen.  xlvi.  23;  though  this 
family  no  doubt  branched  out  into  several  smaller  families,  which 
are  not  named  here,  simply  because  this  list  contains  only  the  lead- 
ing families  into  which  the  tribes  were  divided. — Yers.  44-47. 
The  families  of  Asher  agree  with  the  sons  of  Asher  mentioned  in 
Gen.  xlvi.  17  and  1  Chron.  vii.  30,  except  that  Ishuah  is  omitted 
here,  because  he  founded  no  family. — ^Yers.  48-50.  The  families 
of  Naphtali  tally  with  the  sons  of  Naphtali  in  Gen.  xlvi.  24  and 
1  Chron.  vii.  30. — Yer.  51.  The  total  number  of  the  persons 
mustered  was  601,730. 

Yers.  52-56.  Instructions  concerning  the  Distribution 
OF  the  Land. — In  vers.  53,  54,  the  command  is  given  to  distribute 
the  land  as  an  inheritance  among  the  twelve  tribes  ("  unto  these  "), 
according  to  the  number  of  the  names  (chap.  i.  2-18),  i.e.  of  the 
persons  counted  by  name  in  each  of  their  families.  To  a  numerous 
tribe  they  were  to  make  the  inheritance  great ;  to  the  littleness,  i.e. 
to  the  tribes  and  families  that  contained  only  a  few  persons,  they 
were  to  make  it  small ;  to  every  one  according  to  the  measure  of  its 
mustered  persons  (?  must  be  repeated  before  ^i^).  In  vers.  55,  56, 
it  is  still  further  commanded  that  the  distribution  should  take  place 
by  lot.  ''  According  to  the  names  of  their  paternal  tribes  shall  they 
(the  children  of  Israel)  receive  it  (the  land)  for  an  inheritance.^^ 
The  meaning  of  these  words  can  only  be,  that  every  tribe  was  to 
receive  a  province  of  its  own  for  an  inheritance,  which  should  be 
called  by  its  name  for  ever.  The  other  regulation  in  ver.  56, 
"  according  to  the  measure  of  the  lot  shall  its  inheritance  (the  in- 
heritance of  every  tribe)  he  divided  between  the  numerous  and  the 
small  (tribe),"  is  no  doubt  to  be  understood  as  signifying,  that  in 


CHAP.  XXVI.  57-62.  211 

the  division  of  tlie  tribe  territories,  according  to  the  comparative 
sizes  of  the  different  tribes,  they  were  to  adhere  to  that  portion  of 
land  which  fell  to  every  tribe  in  the  casting  of  the  lots.  The 
magnitude  and  limits  of  the  possessions  of  the  different  tribes  could 
not  be  determined  by  the  lot  according  to  the  magnitude  of  the 
tribes  themselves :  all  that  could  possibly  be  determined  was  the 
situation  to  be  occupied  by  the  tribe ;  so  that  B,  Bechai  is  quite 
correct  in  observing  that  "  the  casting  of  the  lot  took  place  for  the 
more  convenient  distribution  of  the  different  portions,  whether  of 
better  or  inferior  condition,  that  there  might  be  no  occasion  for- 
strife  and  covetousness,"  though  the  motive  assigned  is  too  partial 
in  its  character.  The  lot  was  to  determine  the  portion  of  every 
tribe,  not  merely  to  prevent  all  occasion  for  dissatisfaction  and 
complaining,  but  in  order  that  every  tribe  might  receive  with 
gratitude  the  possession  that  fell  to  its  lot  as  the  inheritance 
assigned  it  by  God,  the  result  of  the  lot  being  regarded  by  almost 
all  nations  as  determined  by  God  Himself  (cf.  Prov.  xvi.  33, 
xviii.  18).  On  this  ground  not  only  was  the  lot  resorted  to  by  the 
Greeks  and  Romans  in  the  distribution  of  conquered  lands  (see  the 
proofs  in  Clericus,  Bosenmuller,  and  Knobel),  but  it  is  still  employed 
in  the  division  of  lands.  (For  further  remarks,  see  at  Josh.  xiv.  1 
sqq.) 

Vers.  57-62.  Mustering  of  the  Levites. — The  enumera- 
tion of  the  different  Levitical  families  into  which  the  three  leading 
families  of  Levi,  that  were  founded  by  his  three  sons  Gershon, 
Kohath,  and  Merari,  w^ere  divided,  is  not  complete,  but  is  broken 
off  in  ver.  58  after  the  notice  of  five  different  families,  for  the 
purpose  of  tracing  once  more  the  descent  of  Moses  and  Aaron,  the 
heads  not  of  this  tribe  only,  but  of  the  whole  nation,  and  also  of 
giving  the  names  of  the  sons  of  the  latter  (vers.  59-61).  And  after 
this  the  whole  is  concluded  with  a  notice  of  the  total  number  of 
those  who  were  mustered  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  (ver.  62). — Of  the 
different  families  mentioned,  Libni  belonged  to  Gershon  (cf.  chap, 
iii.  21),  Hehroni  to  Kohath  (chap.  iii.  27),  Machli  and  Mushi  to 
Merari  (chap.  iii.  33),  and  Korchi,  i.e.  the  family  of  Korah  (accord- 
ing to  chap.  xvi.  1 ;  cf.  Ex.  vi.  21  and  24),  to  Kohath.  Moses  and 
Aaron  were  descendants  of  Kohath  (see  at  Ex.  vi.  20  and  ii.  1). 
Some  difficulty  is  caused  by  the  relative  clause,  "  whom  (one)  had 
horn  to  Levi  in  Egypt "  (ver.  59),  on  account  of  the  subject  being 
left  indefinite.     It  cannot  be  Levi's  wife,  as  Jarchi,  Ahenezra^  and 


212  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


1 


others  suppose;  for  Jochehed^  the  mother  of  Moses,  was  not 
daughter  of  Levi  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word,  but  only  a  Levitess 
or  descendant  of  Levi,  who  lived  about  300  years  after  Levi ;  just 
as  her  husband  Amram  was  not  actually  the  son  of  Amram,  who 
bore  that  name  (Ex.  vi.  18),  but  a  later  descendant  of  this  older 
Amram  (see  vol.  i.  pp.  469  sqq.).  The  missing  subject  must  be 
derived  from  the  verb  itself,  viz.  either  fllr'"?  oi'  '^?^  O^er  mother), 
as  in  1  Kings  i.  6,  another  passage  in  which  "  his  mother  "  is  to  be 
supplied  (cf.  Eivald,  §  294,  5.). — Yers.  60,  61.  Sons  of  Aaron:  of. 
chap.  iii.  2  and  4 ;  Ex.  vi.  23 ;  Lev.  x.  1,  2.— -Ver.  62.  The  Levites 
were  not  niustered  along  with  the  rest  of  the  tribes  of  Israel, 
because  the  mustering  took  place  with  especial  reference  to  the 
conquest  of  Canaan,  and  the  Levites  were  not  to  receive  any  terri- 
tory as  a  tribe  (see  at  chap,  xviii.  20). — Vers.  63-65.  Concluding 
formula  with  the  remark  in  ver.  Qfb,  that  the  penal  sentence  which 
God  had  pronounced  in  chap.  xiv.  29  and  38  upon  the  generation 
which  came  out  of  Egj^pt,  had  been  completely  carried  out. 

THE  DAUGHTERS  OF  ZELOPHEHAD  CLAIM  TO  INHERIT.  THE 
DEATH  OF  MOSES  FORETOLD  :  CONSECRATION  OF  JOSHUA  AS 
HIS  SUCCESSOR. — CHAP.  XXVII. 

Vers.  1-11.  Claims  of  Zelophehad's  Daughters  to  an 
Inheritance  in  the  Promised  Land. — Vers.  1-4.  The  divine 
instructions  which  were  given  at  the  mustering  of  the  tribes,  to  the 
effect  that  the  land  was  to  be  divided  among  the  tribes  in  propor- 
tion to  the  larger  or  smaller  number  of  their  families  (chap.  xxvi. 
52-56),  induced  the  daughters  of  Zelopheliad  the  Manassite  of  the 
family  of  Gilead,  the  son  of  Machir,  to  appear  before  the  princes  of 
the  congregation,  who  were  assembled  with  Moses  and  Eleazar  at 
the  tabernacle,  with  a  request  that  they  would  assign  them  an 
inheritance  in  the  family  of  the  father,  as  he  had  died  in  the  desert 
without  leaving  any  sons,  and  had  not  taken  part  in  the  rebellion 
of  the  company  of  Korah,  which  might  have  occasioned  his  exclu- 
sion from  any  participation  in  the  promised  land,  but  had  simply 
died  "  through  his  (own)  sin,"  i.e.  on  account  of  such  a  sin  as  every 
one  commits,  and  such  as  all  who  died  in  the  wilderness  had  com- 
mitted as  well  as  he.  "  Why  should  the  name  of  ow  father  be  cut 
off  (cease)  from  the  midst  of  his  family  V^  This  would  have  been 
the  case,  for  example,  if  no  inheritance  had  been  assigned  him  in 
the  land,  because  he  left  no  son.   In  that  case  his  family  would  have 


CHAP.  XXVII.  12-14.  213 

become  extinct,  if  his  daughters  had  married  into  other  famiUes  or 
tribes.  On  the  other  hand,  if  his  daughters  received  a  possession 
of  their  own  among  the  brethren  of  their  father,  the  name  of  their 
father  would  be  preserved  by  it,  since  they  could  then  marry  hus- 
bands who  would  enter  upon  their  landed  property,  and  their  father's 
name  and  possession  would  be  perpetuated  through  their  children. 
This  wish  on  the  part  of  the  daughters  was  founded  upon  an  as- 
sumption which  rested  no  doubt  upon  an  ancient  custom,  namely, 
that  in  the  case  of  marriages  where  the  wives  had  brought  landed 
property  as  their  dowry,  the  sons  who  inherited  the  maternal  pro- 
perty were  received  through  this  inheritance  into  the  family  of  their 
mother,  i.e,  of  their  grandfather  on  the  mother's  side.  We  have  an 
example  of  this  in  the  case  of  JarJia,  who  belonged  to  the  pre- 
Mosaic  times  (1  Chron.  ii.  34,  35).  In  all  probability  this  took 
place  in  every  instance  in  which  daughters  received  a  portion  of 
the  paternal  possessions  as  their  dowry,  even  though  there  might 
be  sons  alive.  This  would  explain  the  introduction  of  Jair  among 
the  Manassites  in  chap,  xxxii.  41,  Deut.  iii.  14.  His  father  Segub 
was  the  son  of  Hezron  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  but  his  mother  was 
the  daughter  of  Machir  the  Manassite  (1  Chron.  ii.  21,  22).  We 
find  another  similar  instance  in  Ezra  ii.  61  and  Neh.  Vii.  63,  where 
the  sons  of  a  priest  who  had  married  one  of  the  daughters  of  Bar- 
zillai  the  rich  Gileadite,  are  called  sons  of  Barzillai. — Vers.  5-7. 
This  question  of  right  (misJipat)  Moses  brought  before  God,  and 
received  instructions  in  reply  to  give  the  daughters  of  Zelophehad 
an  inheritance  among  the  brethren  of  their  father,  as  they  had 
spoken  right.  Further  instructions  were  added  afterwards  in  chap, 
xxxvi.  in  relation  to  the  marriage  of  heiresses. — Yers.  8-11.  On 
this  occasion  God  issued  a  general  law  of  inheritance,  which  was  to 
apply  to  all  cases  as  "  a  statute  of  judgment "  (or  right),  i.e.  a  statute 
determining  right.  If  any  one  died  without  leaving  a  son,  his 
landed  property  was  to  pass  to  his  daughter  (or  daughters) ;  in 
default  of  daughters,  to  his  brothers ;  in  the  absence  of  brothers,  to 
his  paternal  uncles ;  and  if  there  were  none  of  them,  to  his  next  of 
kin. — On  the  intention  of  this  law,  see  my  Archgeol.  §  142  (ii.  pp. 
212,  213);  and  on  the  law  of  inheritance  generally,  see  J.  Selden,  de 
success,  ad  leges  Hehr.  in  bona  defunctorum^  Fkft.  a.  0.  1695. 

Vers.  12-14.  The  Death  of  Moses  foretold. — After  these 
instructions  concerning  the  division  of  the  land,  the  Lord  announced 
to  Moses  his  approaching  end.     From  the  mountains  of  Abarini 


214  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


he  was  to  see  the  land  which  the  Israehtes  would  receive,  and  then 
like  Aaron  to  be  gathered  to  his  people,  because  like  him  he  also 
had  sinned  at  the  water  of  strife  at  Kadesh.  This  announcement 
was  made,  "  that  he  might  go  forward  to  his  death  with  the  fullest  fll 
consciousness,  and  might  set  his  house  in  order,  that  is  to  say,  might 
finish  as  much  as  he  could  while  still  alive,  and  provide  as  much 
as  possible  what  would  make  up  after  his  death  for  the  absence  of  fl 
his  own  person,  upon  which  the  whole  house  of  Israel  was  now  so 
dependent"  (Baumgarten),  The  fulfilment  of  this  announcement 
is  described  in  Deut.  xxxii.  48-52.  The  particular  spot  upon  the 
mountains  of  Abarim  from  which  Moses  saw  the  land  of  Canaan,  is 
also  minutely  described  there.  It  was  Mount  Neho,  upon  which  he 
also  died.  The  mountains  of  Abarim  (cf.  chap,  xxxiii.  47)  are  the 
mountain  range  forming  the  Moabitish  table-land,  which  slope  off 
into  the  steppes  of  Moab.  It  is  upon  this  range,  the  northern  por- 
tion of  which  opposite  to  Jericho  bore  the  name  of  Pisgah,  that  we 
are  to  look  for  Mount  Nebo,  which  is  sometimes  described  as  one  of 
the  mountains  of  Abarim  (Deut.  xxxii.  49),  and  at  other  times  as 
the  top  of  Pisgah  (Deut.  iii.  27,  xxxiv.  1 ;  see  at  chap.  xxi.  20)^ 
Nebo  is  not  to  be  identified  with  Jebel  Atta,rus,  but  to  be  sought 
for  much  farther  to  the  north,  since,  according  to  JEiisebius  (s.  v. 
^A^apeLfi),  it  was  opposite  to  Jericho,  between  LiviaSj  which  was  in 
the  valley  of  the  Jordan  nearly  opposite  to  Jericho,  and  Heshbon ; 
consequently  very  near  to  the  point  which  is  marked  as  the  "  Heights 
of  Nebo  "  on  Van  de  Veldes  map.  The  prospect  from  the  heights 
of  Nebo  must  have  been  a  very  extensive  one.  According  to  Burck- 
hardt  {Syr.  ii.  pp.  106-7),  "even  the  ciij  oi  Heshbon  (Hhuzban) 
itself  stood  upon  so  commanding  an  eminence,  that  the  view  extended 
at  least  thirty  English  miles  in  all  directions,  and  towards  the  south 
probably  as  far  as  sixty  miles."  On  the  expression,  "  gathered  unto 
thy  people,"  see  at  Gen.  xxv.  8,  and  on  Aaron's  death  see  Num. 
XX.  28.  D^''1P  "^^^3  :  "  as  ye  transgressed  My  commandment^  By 
the  double  use  of  "^^&?3  {qiiomodo,  "^s"),  the  death  of  Aaron,  and 
also  that  of  Moses,  are  placed  in  a  definite  relation  to  the  sin  of 
these  two  heads  of  Israel.  As  they  both  sinned  at  Kadesh  against 
the  commandment  of  the  Lord,  so  they  were  both  of  them  to  die 
without  entering  the  land  of  Canaan.  On  tlie  sin,  see  at  chap.  xx. 
12,  13,  and  on  the  desert  of  Zin,  at  chap.  xiii.  21. 

Vers.  15-23.  Consecration  of  Joshua  as  the  Successor 
OF  Moses.  —  Vers.   15-17.     The  announcement  thus  made  to 


I 


CHAP.  XXVII.  15-23.  215 

Moses  led  liim  to  entreat  the  Lord  to  appoint  a  leader  of  His 
people,  that  the  congregation  might  not  be  like  a  flock  without  a 
shepherd.  As  "  God  of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh,"  i.e.  as  the  giver  of 
life  and  breath  to  all  creatures  (see  at  chap.  xvi.  22),  he  asks 
Jehovah  to  appoint  a  man  over  the  congregation,  who  should  go 
out  and  in  before  them,  and  should  lead  them  out  and  in,  i.e.  pre- 
side over  and  direct  them  in  all  their  affairs.  i^)2)  nt<>*  ("  go  out," 
and  "  go  in  ")  is  a  description  of  the  conduct  of  men  in  every-day 
life  (Deut.  xxviii.  6,  xxxi.  2  ;  Josh.  xiv.  11).  N''2ri^  j^'-^n  ("  lead 
out,"  and  "  bring  in")  signifies  the  superintendence  of  the  affairs 
of  the  nation,  and  is  founded  upon  the  figure  of  a  shepherd. — Vers. 
18-21.  The  Lord  then  appointed  Joshua  to  this  oflSce  as  a  man 
"  who  had  spirit."  n^^  (spirit)  does  not  mean  "  insight  and  wis- 
dom" {Knobel),  but  the  higher  power  inspired  by  God  into  the  soul, 
which  quickens  the  moral  and  religious  life,  and  determines  its 
development;  in  this  case,  therefore,  it  was  the  spiritual  endow- 
ment requisite  for  the  office  he  was  called  to  fill.  Moses  was  to 
consecrate  him  for  entering  upon  this  office  by  the  laying  on  of 
hands,  or,  as  is  more  fully  explained  in  vers.  19  and  20,  he  was  to 
set  him  before  Eleazar  the  high  priest  and  the  congregation,  to 
command  Q^^^)  him,  i.e.  instruct  him  with  regard  to  his  office  before 
their  eyes,  and  to  lay  of  his  eminence  (lin)  upon  him,  i.e.  to  trans- 
fer a  portion  of  his  own  dignity  and  majesty  to  him  by  the  imposi- 
tion of  hands,  that  the  whole  congregation  might  hearken  to  him, 
or  trust  to  his  guidance.  The  object  to  ^V^"^]  (hearken)  must  be 
supplied  from  the  context,  viz.  IvK  (to  him),  as  Deut.  xxxiv.  9 
clearly  shows.  The  |p  (of)  in  ver.  20  is  partitive,  as  in  Gen.  iv.  4, 
etc.  The  eminence  and  authority  of  Moses  were  not  to  be  entirely 
transferred  to  Joshua,  for  they  were  bound  up  with  his  own  person 
alone  (cf.  chap.  xii.  6-8),  but  only  so  much  of  it  as  he  needed  for 
the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  his  office.  Joshua  was  to  be  neither 
the  lawgiver  nor  the  absolute  governor  of  Israel,  but  to  be  placed 
under  the  judgment  of  the  Uriniy  with  which  Eleazar  was  entrusted, 
so  far  as  the  supreme  decision  of  the  affairs  of  Israel  was  concerned. 
This  is  the  meaning  of  ver.  21  :  "  Eleazar  shall  ask  to  him  (for 
him)  the  judgment  of  the  Urim  before  JehovahJ^  Urim  is  an  abbre- 
viation for  Urim  and  Thummim  (Ex.  xxviii.  30),  and  denotes  the 
means  with  which  the  high  priest  was  entrusted  of  ascertaining  the 
divine  will  and  counsel  in  all  the  important  business  of  the  congre- 
gation. "  After  his  mouth^^  (i.e.  according  to  the  decision  of  the 
high  priest,  by  virtue  of  the  right  of  Urim  and  Thummim  entrusted 


216  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


to  him),  Joshua  and  the  whole  congregation  were  to  go  out  and  in, 
i.e.  to  regulate  their  conduct  and  decide  upon  their  undertakings. 
"  All  the  congregation,"  in  distinction  from  "  all  the  children  of 
Israel,"  denotes  the  whole  body  of  heads  of  the  people,  or  the  col- 
lege of  elders,  which  represented  the  congregation  and  administered 
its  affairs. — Vers.  22,  23.  Execution  of  the  divine  command 


1 


ORDER  OF  THE  DAILY  AND  FESTAL  OFFERINGS  OF  THE 
CONGREGATION. — CHAP.  XXVIII.  AND  XXIX. 


i 


When  Israel  was  prepared  for  the  conquest  of  the  promised 
land  by  the  fresh  numbering  and  mustering  of  its  men,  and  by  the 
appointment  of  Joshua  as  commander,  its  relation  to  the  Lord  was 
regulated  by  a  law  which  determined  the  sacrifices  through  which  it 
was  to  maintain  its  fellowship  with  its  God  from  day  to  day,  and  serve 
Him  as  His  people  (chap,  xxviii.  and  xxix.).  Through  this  order 
of  sacrifice,  the  object  of  which  was  to  form  and  sanctify  the  whole 
life  of  the  congregation  into  a  continuous  worship,  the  sacrificial 
and  festal  laws  already  given  in  Ex.  xxiii.  14-17,  xxix.  38-42, 
xxxi.  12-17,  Lev.  xxiii.,  and  Num.  xxv.  1-12,  were  completed  and 
arranged  into  a  united  and  well-ordered  whole.  "  It  was  very 
fitting  that  this  law  should  be  issued  a  short  time  before  the  ad- 
vance into  Canaan ;  for  it  was  there  first  that  the  Israelites  were 
in  a  position  to  carry  out  the  sacrificial  worship  in  all  its  full 
extent,  and  to  observe  all  the  sacrificial  and  festal  laws"  {Knohel). 
The  law  commences  with  the  daily  morning  and  evening  burnt- 
offering  (vers.  3-8),  which  was  instituted  at  Sinai  at  the  dedication 
of  the  altar.  It  is  not  merely  for  the  sake  of  completeness  that  it 
is  introduced  here,  or  for  the  purpose  of  including  all  the  national 
sacrifices  that  were  to  be  offered  during  the  whole  year  in  one 
general  survey ;  but  also  for  an  internal  reason,  viz.  that  the  daily 
sacrifice  was  also  to  be  offered  on  the  Sabbaths  and  feast-days,  to 
accompany  the  general  and  special  festal  sacrifices,  and  to  form  the 
common  substratum  for  the  whole  of  these.  Then  follow  in  vers. 
9-15  the  sacrifices  to  be  offered  on  the  Sabbath  and  at  the  new 
moon ;  and  in  ver.  16— chap.  xxix.  38  the  general  sacrifices  for  the 
different  yearly  feasts,  which  were  to  be  added  to  the  sacrifices  that 
were  peculiar  to  each  particular  festival,  having  been  appointed  at 
the  time  of  its  first  institution,  and  being  specially  adapted  to  give 
expression  to  its  specific  character,  so  that,  at  the  yearly  feasts,  the 
congregation  had  to  offer  their  different  kinds  of  sacrifices :  (a)  the 


CHAP.  XXVIIL  XXIX.  217 

daily  morning  and  evening  sacrifice ;  (b)  the  general  sacrifices  that 
were  offered  on  every  feast-day ;  and  (c)  the  festal  sacrifices  that 
were  peculiar  to  each  particular  feast.  This  cumulative  arrange- 
ment is  to  be  explained  from  the  significance  of  the  daily  and  of 
the  festal  sacrifices.  In  the  daily  burnt-offering  the  congregation 
of  Israel,  as  a  congregation  of  Jehovah,  was  to  sanctify  its  life, 
body,  soul,  and  spirit,  to  the  Lord  its  God ;  and  on  the  Lord's  feast- 
days  it  was  to  give  expression  to  this  sanctification  in  an  intensified 
form.  This  stronger  practical  exhibition  of  the  sanctification  of  the 
life  was  embodied  in  the  worship  by  the  elevation  and  graduation 
of  the  daily  sacrifice,  through  the  addition  of  a  second  and  much 
more  considerable  bumt-offering,  meat-offering,  and  drink-offering. 
The  graduation  was  regulated  by  the  significance  of  the  festivals. 
On  the  Sabbaths  the  daily  sacrifice  was  doubled,  by  the  presenta- 
tion of  a  bumt-offering  consisting  of  two  lambs.  On  the  other 
feast-days  it  was  increased  by  a  bumt-offering  composed  of  oxen, 
rams,  and  yearling  lambs,  which  was  always  preceded  by  a  sin- 
offering. — As  the  seventh  day  of  the  week,  being  a  Sabbath,  was 
distinguished  above  the  other  days  of  the  week,  as  a  day  that  w^as 
sanctified  to  the  Lord  in  a  higher  degree  than  the  rest,  by  an 
enlarged  bumt-offering,  meat-offering,  and  drink-offering ;  so  the 
seventh  month,  being  a  Sabbath-month,  was  raised  above  the  other 
months  of  the  year,  and  sanctified  as  a  festal  month,  by  the  fact 
that,  in  addition  to  the  ordinary  new  moon  sacrifices  of  two  bullocks, 
one  ram,  and  seven  yearling  lambs,  a  special  festal  sacrifice  was 
also  offered,  consisting  of  one  bullock,  one  ram,  and  seven  yearling 
lambs  (chap.  xxix.  2),  which  was  also  repeated  on  the  day  of  atone- 
ment, and  at  the  close  of  the  f^ast  of  Tabernacles  (chap.  xxix.  8,  36) ; 
and  also  that  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  which  fell  in  this  month,  was 
to  be  celebrated  by  a  much  larger  number  of  burnt-offerings,  as 
the  largest  and  holiest  feast  of  the  congregation  of  Israel.^ 

^  KnobeVs  remarks  as  to  the  difference  in  the  sacrifices  are  not  only  erro- 
neous, but  likely  to  mislead,  and  tending  to  obscure  and  distort  the  actual  facts. 
"  On  those  feast-days,"  he  says,  "  which  were  intended  as  a  general  festival  to 
Jehovah,  viz.  the  sabbatical  portion  of  the  seventh  new  moon,  the  day  of  atone- 
ment, and  the  closing  day  of  the  yearly  feasts,  the  sacrifices  consisted  of  one 
bullock,  one  ram,  and  seven  yearling  lambs  (chap.  xxix.  2,  8,  36)  ;  whereas  at 
the  older  festivals  which  had  a  reference  to  nature,  such  as  the  new  moons,  the 
days  of  unleavened  bread,  and  the  feast  of  Weeks,  they  consisted  of  two  bullocks, 
one  ram,  and  seven  yearling  lambs  (chap,  xxviii.  11,  19,  24,  27  ;  xxix.  6),  and 
at  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  of  even  a  larger  number,  especially  of  bullocks  (chap, 
xxix.  12  sqq.).    In  the  last,  Jehovah  was  especially  honoured,  as  having  poured 


218  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


4 


All  the  feasts  of  the  whole  year,  for  example,  formed  a  cycl^ 
of  feast-days,  arranged  according  to  the  number  seven,  which  had 
its  starting-point  and  centre  in  the  Sabbath,  and  was  regulated 
according  to  the  division  of  time  established  at  the  creation,  into 
weeks,  months,  years,  and  periods  of  years,  ascending  from  the 
weekly  Sabbath  to  the  monthly  Sabbath,  the  sabbatical  year,  and 
the  year  of  jubilee.  In  this  cycle  of  holy  periods,  regulated  as  it 
was  by  the  number  seven,  and  ever  expanding  into  larger  and 
larger  circles,  there  was  embodied  the  whole  revolution  of  annually 
recurring  festivals,  established  to  commemorate  the  mighty  works 
of  the  Lord  for  the  preservation  and  inspiration  of  His  people. 
And  this  was  done  in  the  following  manner :  in  the  first  place,  the 
number  of  yearly  feasts  amounted  to  exactly  seven,  of  which  the 
two  leading  feasts  {Mazzoth  and  the  feast  of  labernades)  lasted 
seve7i  days ;  in  the  second  place,  in  all  the  feasts,  some  of  which 
were  of  only  one  day's  duration,  whilst  others  lasted  seven  days, 
there  were  only  seven  days  that  were  to  be  observed  with  sabbatical 
rest  and  a  holy  meeting ;  and  in  the  tJi{7'd  place,  the  seven  feasts 
w.ere  formed  into  two  large  festal  circles,  each  of  which  consisted  of 
an  introductory  feast,  the  main  feast  of  seven  days,  and  a  closing 
feast  of  one  day.  The  fii^st  of  these  festal  circles  was  commemo- 
rative of  the  elevation  of  Israel  into  the  nation  of  God,  and  its 
subsequent  preservation.  It  commenced  on  the  14th  Abib  (Nisan) 
with  the  Passover,  which  was  appointed  to  commemorate  the  de- 
liverance of  Israel  from  the  destroying  angel  who  smote  the  first- 
born of  Egypt,  as  the  introductory  festival.  It  culminated  in  the 
seven  days'  feast  of  unleavened  bread,  as  the  feast  of  the  deliver- 
ance of  Israel  from  bondage,  and  its  elevation  into  the  nation  of 

out  His  blessing  upon  nature,  and  granted  a  plentiful  harvest  to  the  cultivation 
of  the  soil.  The  ox  was  the  beast  of  agriculture."  It  was  not  the  so-called 
"  older  festivals  which  had  reference  to  nature  "  that  were  distinguished  by  a 
larger  number  of  sacrificial  animals,  above  those  feast-days  which  were  intended 
as  general  festivals  to  Jehovah,  but  the  feasts  of  the  seventh  month  alone. 
Thus  the  seventh  new  moon's  day  was  celebrated  by  a  double  new  moon's 
sacrifice,  viz.  with  three  bullocks,  two  rams,  and  fourteen  yearling  lambs  ;  the 
feast  of  atonementf,  as  the  introductory  festival  of  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  by  a 
special  festal  sacrifice,  whilst  the  day  of  Passover,  which  corresponded  to  it  in 
the  first  festal  cycle,  as  the  introductory  festival  of  the  feast  of  unleavened 
bread,  had  no  general  festal  sacrifices  ;  and,  lastly,  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  not 
only  by  a  very  considerable  increase  in  the  number  of  the  festal  sacrifices  on 
every  one  of  the  seven  days,  but  also  by  the  addition  of  an  eighth  day,  as  the 
octave  of  the  feast,  and  a  festal  sacrifice  answering  to  those  of  the  first  and 
seventh  days  of  this  month. 


I 


CHAP.  XXVIII.  219 

God ;  and  closed  with  the  feast  of  Weeks,  Pentecost,  or  the  feast  of 
Harvest,  which  was  kept  seven  weeks  after  the  offering  of  the  sheaf 
of  first-fruits,  on  the  second  day  of  Mazzoth.  This  festal  circle 
contained  only  three  days  that  were  to  be  kept  with  sabbatical  rest 
and  a  holy  meeting  (viz.  the  first  and  seventh  days  of  Mazzoth  and 
the  day  of  Pentecost).  The  second  festal  circle  fell  entirely  in  the 
seventh  month,  and  its  main  object  was  to  inspire  the  IsraeHtes  in 
their  enjoyment  of  the  blessings  of  their  God  :  for  this  reason  it  was 
celebrated  by  the  presentation  of  a  large  number  of  burnt-offerings. 
This  festal  circle  opened  with  the  day  of  atonement,  which  was 
appointed  for  the  tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month,  as  the  intro- 
ductory feast,  culminated  in  the  seven  days''  feast  of  Tabernacles, 
and  closed  with  the  eighth  day,  which  was  added  to  the  seven  feast- 
days  as  the  octave  of  this  festive  circle,  or  the  solemn  close  of  all 
the  feasts  of  the  year.  This  also  included  only  three  days  that 
were  to  be  commemorated  with  sabbatical  rest  and  a  holy  meeting 
(the  10th,  15th,  and  22d  of  the  month)  ;  but  to  these  we  have  to 
add  the  day  of  trumpets,  with  which  the  month  commenced,  which 
was  also  a  Sabbath  of  rest  with  a  holy  meeting ;  and  this  completes 
the  seven  days  of  rest  (see  my  Archceologie,  i.  §  76). 

Chap,  xxviii.  Ver.  2  contains  the  general  instruction  to  offer  to 
the  Lord  His  sacrificial  gift  "  at  the  time  appointed  by  Him."  On 
corhan,  see  at  Lev.  i.  2  (vol.  ii.  p.  282,  comp.  with  p.  271) ;  on  "  tJie 
bread  of  Jehovah"  at  Lev.  iii.  11;  on  the  "  sacrifice  made  by  fire,"  and 
"  a  sweet  savour"  at  Lev.  i.  9  ;  and  on  "  moed"  at  Lev.  xxiii.  2,  4. — 
Vers.  3-8.  The  daily  sacrifice :  as  it  had  already  been  instituted  at 
Sinai  (Ex.  xxix.  38-42). — Ver.  7.  "  In  the  sanctuary,^^  i.e.  irepl  top 
^cofiov  (round  about  the  altar),  as  Josephus  paraphrases  it  (Ant.  iii. 
10)  ;  not  "  with  (in)  holy  vessels,"  as  Jonathan  and  others  interpret 
it.  "  Pour  out  a  drink-offering,  as  "i3t^  for  Jehovah^  Shecar  does  not 
mean  intoxicating  drink  here  (see  at  Lev.  x.  9),  but  strong  drink,  in 
distinction  from  water  as  simple  drink.  The  drink-offering  con- 
sisted of  wine  only  (see  at  chap.  xv.  5  sqq.)  ;  and  hence  Onkelos 
paraphrases  it,  "  of  old  wine." — Vers.  9,  10.  The  Sabbath-offering, 
which  was  to  be  added  to  the  daily  sacrifice  (^V,  upon  it),  consisted 
of  two  yearling  lambs  as  a  burnt-offering,  with  the  corresponding 
meat-offering  and  drink-offering,  according  to  the  general  rule  laid 
down  in  chap.  xv.  3  sqq.,  and  is  appointed  here  for  the  first  time ; 
whereas  the  sabbatical  feast  had  already  been  instituted  at  Ex.  xx. 
8-11  and  Lev.  xxiii.  3.  "  The  burnt-offering  of  the  Sabbath  on  its 
Sabbath"  i.e.  as  often  as  the  Sabbath  occurred,  every  Sabbath. — 


220  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


1 


Yers.  11-15.  At  the  beginnings  of  the  month,  i.e,  at  the  new 
moons,  a  larger  burnt-offering  was  to  be  added  to  the  daily  or  con- 
tinual burnt-offering,  consisting  of  two  bullocks  (young  oxen),  one 
ram,  and  seven  yearling  lambs,  with  the  corresponding  meat  and 
drink-offerings,  as  the  "  month's  burnt-offering  in  its  (i.e.  every) 
month  with  regard  to  the  months  of  the  year,"  i.e.  corresponding 
to  them.  To  this  there  was  also  to  be  added  a  sin-offering  of  a  J| 
shaggy  goat  (see  at  Lev.  iv.  23).  The  custom  of  distinguishing "" 
the  beginnings  of  the  months  or  new  moon's  days  by  a  peculiar 
festal  sacrifice,  without  their  being,  strictly  speaking,  festal  days, 
with  sabbatical  rest  and  a  holy  meeting,^  arose  from  the  relation  in 
which  the  month  stood  to  the  single  day.  "  If  the  congregation 
was  to  sanctify  its  life  and  labour  to  the  Lord  every  day  by  a  burnt- 
offering,  it  could  not  well  be  omitted  at  the  commencement  of  the 
larger  division  of  time  formed  by  the  month ;  on  the  contrary,  it  was 
only  right  that  the  commencement  of  a  new  month  should  be  sanc- 
tified by  a  special  sacrifice.  Whilst,  then,  a  burnt-offering,  in  which 
the  idea  of  expiation  was  subordinate  to  that  of  consecrating  sur- 
render to  the  Lord,  was  sufficient  for  the  single  day ;  for  the  whole 
month  it  was  necessary  that,  in  consideration  of  the  sins  that  had 
been  committed  in  the  course  of  the  past  month,  and  had  remained 
without  expiation,  a  special  sin-offering  should  be  offered  for  their 
expiation,  in  order  that,  upon  the  ground  of  the  forgiveness  and 
reconciliation  with  God  which  had  been  thereby  obtained,  the  lives 
of  the  people  might  be  sanctified  afresh  to  the  Lord  in  the  burnt- 
offering.  This  significance  of  the  new  moon  sacrifice  was  still 
further  intensified  by  the  fact,  that  during  the  presentation  of  the 
sacrifice  the  priests  sounded  the  silver  trumpets,  in  order  that  it 
might  be  to  the  congregation  for  a  memorial  before  God  (chap.  x. 
10).  The  trumpet  blast  was  intended  to  bring  before  God  the 
prayers  of  the  congregation  embodied  in  the  sacrifice,  that  God 
might  remember  them  in  mercy,  granting  them  the  forgiveness  of 
their  sins  and  power  for  sanctification,  and  quickening  them  again 
in  the  fellowship  of  His  saving  grace"  (see  my  Archceologie,  i. 

^  In  later  times,  however,  the  new  moon  grew  more  and  more  into  a  feast- 
day,  trade  was  suspended  (Amos  viii.  5),  the  pious  Israelite  sought  instruction 
from  the  prophets  (2  Kings  iv.  23),  many  families  and  households  presented 
yearly  thank-offerings  (1  Sam.  xx.  6,  29),  and  at  a  still  later  period  the  most 
devout  abstained  from  fasting  (Judith  viii.  6)  ;  consequently  it  is  frequently 
referred  to  by  the  prophets  as  a  feast  resembling  the  Sabbath  (Isa.  i.  13  ;  Hos. 
ii.  13  ;  Ezek.  xlvi.  1). 


CHAP.  XXIX.  221 

p.  369). — Vers.  16-25.  The  same  number  of  sacrifices  as  at  the 
new  moon  were  to  be  offered  on  every  one  of  the  seven  days  of  the 
feast  of  unleavened  bread  (3fazzotJi),  from  the  15th  to  the  21st 
of  the  month,  whereas  there  was  no  general  festal  offering  on  the 
day  of  the  Passover,  or  the  14th  of  the  month  (Ex.  xii.  3-14).  With 
regard  to  the  feast  of  Mazzoth,  the  rule  is  repeated  from  Ex.  xii. 
15-20  and  Lev.  xxiii.  6-8,  that  on  the  first  and  seventh  day  there 
was  to  be  a  Sabbath  rest  and  holy  meeting. — ^Vers.  23,  24.  The 
festal  sacrifices  of  the  seven  days  were  to  be  prepared  "  in  addition 
to  the  morning  burnt-offering,  which  served  as  the  continual  burnt- 
offering."  This  implies  that  the  festal  sacrifices  commanded  were  to 
be  prepared  and  offered  everyday  after  the  morning  sacrifice. — 
Vers.  26-31.  The  same  number  of  sacrifices  is  appointed  for  the 
day  of  the  first-fruits,  i.e,  for  the  feast  of  Weeks  or  Harvest  feast  (cf . 
Lev.  xxiii.  15-22).  The  festal  burnt-offering  and  sin-offering  of 
this  one  day  was  independent  of  the  supplementary  burnt-offering 
and  sin-offering  of  the  wave-loaves  appointed  in  Lev.  xxiii.  18,  and 
was  to  be  offered  before  these  and  after  the  daily  morning  sacrifice. 
Chap.  xxix.  1-6.  The  festal  sacrifice  for  the  neio  moon  of  the 
seventh  month  consisted  of  a  burnt-offering  of  one  bullock,  one  ram, 
and  seven  yearling  lambs,  with  the  corresponding  meat-offerings 
and  drink-offerings,  and  a  sin-offering  of  a  he-goat,  "  besides"  {i.e, 
in  addition  to)  the  monthty  and  daily  bumt-offering,  meat-offering, 
and  drink-offering.  Consequently  the  sacrifices  presented  on  the 
seventh  new  moon's  day  were,  (1)  a  yearling  lamb  in  the  morning 
and  evening,  with  their  meat-offering  and  drink-offering;  (2)  in 
the  morning,  after  the  daily  sacrifice,  the  ordinary  new  moon's 
sacrifice,  consisting  of  two  bullocks,  one  ram,  and  seven  yearling 
lambs,  with  their  corresponding  meat-offerings  and  drink-offerings 
(see  at  ver.  11)  ;  (3)  the  sin-offering  of  the  he-goat,  together  with 
the  bumt-offering  of  one  bullock,  one  ram,  and  seven  yearling 
lambs,  with  their  proper  meat-offerings  and  drink-offerings,  the 
meaning  of  which  has  been  pointed  out  at  Lev.  xxiii.  23  sqq. — Vers. 
7—11.  On  the  day  of  atonement^  on  the  tenth  of  the  seventh  month, 
a  similar  festal  sacrifice  was  to  be  offered  to  the  one  presented  on 
the  seventh  new  moon's  day  (a  burnt-offering  and  sin-offering),  in 
addition  to  the  sin-offering  of  atonement  prescribed  at  Lev.  xvi., 
and  the  daily  burnt-offerings.  For  a  more  minute  description  of 
this  festival,  see  at  Lev.  xvi.  and  xxiii.  26-32. — Vers.  12-34.  The 
feast  of  Tabernacles^  the  special  regulations  for  the  celebration  of 
which  arc  contained  in  Lev.  xxiii.  34-36  and  39-43,  was  distin- 


222  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSKS. 


guished  above  all  the  other  feasts  of  the  year  by  the  great  number 
of  burnt-offerings,  which  raised  it  into  the  greatest  festival  of  joy. 
On  the  seven  feast-days,  the  first  of  which  was  to  be  celebrated 
with  sabbatical  rest  and  a  holy  meeting,  there  were  to  be  offered,  in 
addition  to  the  daily  burnt-offering,  every  day  a  he-goat  for  a  sin- 
offering,  and  seventy  oxen  in  all  for  a  burnt-offering  during  the 
seven  days,  as  well  as  every  day  two  rams  and  fourteen  yearling  11 
lambs,  with  the  requisite  meat-offerings  and  drink-offerings.  Whilst,  - 
therefore,  the  number  of  rams  and  lambs  was  double  the  number 
offered  at  the  Passover  and  feast  of  Pentecost,  the  number  of  oxen 
was  fivefold ;  for,  instead  of  fourteen,  there  were  seventy  offered 
during  the  seven  days.  This  multiplication  of  the  oxen  was  distri- 
buted in  such  a  way,  that  instead  of  there  being  ten  offered  every 
day,  there  were  thirteen  on  the  first  day,  twelve  on  the  second,  and 
so  on,  deducting  one  every  day,  so  that  on  the  seventh  day  there 
were  exactly  seven  offered;  the  arrangement  being  probably  made  fll 
for  the  purpose  of  securing  the  holy  number  seven  for  this  last  day, 
and  indicating  at  the  same  time,  through  the  gradual  diminution  in 
the  number  of  sacrificial  oxen,  the  gradual  decrease  in  the  festal 
character  of  the  seven  festal  days.  The  reason  for  this  multiplication 
in  the  number  of  burnt-offerings  is  to  be  sought  for  in  the  nature  _  - 
of  the  feast  itself.  Their  living  in  booths  had  already  visibly  re-  ^  | 
presented  to  the  people  the  defence  and  blessing  of  their  God ;  and 
the  foliage  of  these  booths  pointed  out  the  glorious  advantages  of 
the  inheritance  received  from  the  Lord.  But  this  festival  followed 
the  completion  of  the  ingathering  of  the  fruits  of  the  orchard  and 
vineyard,  and  therefore  was  still  more  adapted,  on  account  of  the 
rich  harvest  of  splendid  and  costly  fruits  which  their  inheritance 
had  yielded,  and  which  they  were  about  to  enjoy  in  peace  now  that 
the  labour  of  agriculture  was  over,  to  fill  their  hearts  with  the 
greatest  joy  and  gratitude  towards  the  Lord  and  Giver  of  them  all, 
and  to  make  this  festival  a  speaking  representation  of  the  blessed- 
ness of  the  people  of  God  when  resting  from  their  labours.  This 
blessedness  which  the  Lord  had  prepared  for  His  people,  was  also 
expressed  in  the  numerous  burnt-offerings  that  w^ere  sacrificed  on 
every  one  of  the  seven  days,  and  in  which  the  congregation  presented 
itself  soul  and  body  to  the  Lord,  upon  the  basis  of  a  sin-offering,  as 
a  living  and  holy  sacrifice,  to  be  more  and  more  sanctified,  trans- 
formed, and  perfected  by  the  fire  of  His  holy  love  (see  my  ArchdoL 
i.  p.  416). — Vers.  35-38.  The  eighth  day  was  to  be  azereth,  a  closing 
feast,  and  only  belonged  to  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  so  far  as  the 


CHAP.  XXX.  223 

Sabbath  rest  and  holy  meeting  of  the  seventh  feast-day  were  trans- 
ferred to  it;  whilst,  so  far  as  its  sacrifices  were  concerned,  it  resembled 
the  seventh  new  moon's  day  and  the  day  of  atonement,  and  was 
thus  shown  to  be  the  octave  or  close  of  the  second  festal  circle  (see 
at  Lev.  xxiii.  36). — Ver.  39.  The  sacrifices  already  mentioned  were 
to  be  presented  to  the  Lord  on  the  part  of  the  congregation,  in 
addition  to  the  burnt-offerings,  meat-offerings,  drink-offerings,  and 
peace-offerings  which  individuals  or  families  might  desire  to  offer 
either  spontaneously  or  in  consequence  of  vows.  On  the  vowing  of 
burnt-offerings  and  peace-offerings,  see  chap.  xv.  3,  8  ;  Lev.  xxii. 
18,  21. — Ver.  40  forms  the  conclusion  of  the  list  of  sacrifices  in 
chap,  xxviii.  and  xxix. 

INSTRUCTIONS  AS  TO  THE  FORCE  OF  VOWS. — CHAP.  XXX. 

The  rules  by  wdiich  vows  were  to  be  legally  regulated,  so  far  as 
their  objects  and  their  discharge  were  concerned,  has  been  already 
laid  down  in  Lev.  xxvii. ;  but  the  chapter  before  us  contains  in- 
structions with  reference  to  the  force  of  vows  and  renunciations. 
These  are  so  far  in  place  in  connection  with  the  general  rules  of 
sacrifice,  that  vows  related  for  the  most  part  to  the  presentation 
of  sacrifices ;  and  even  vows  of  renunciation  partook  of  the  character 
of  worship.  The  instructions  in  question  were  addressed  (ver.  1)  to 
"  the  heads  of  the  tribes,"  because  they  entered  into  the  sphere  of 
civil  rights,  namely,  into  that  of  family  life. — Ver.  2.  At  the  head 
there  stands  the  general  rule,  "  If  any  one  vow  a  vow  to  Jehovah^  or 
swear  an  oath,  to  hind  his  soul  to  abstinence,  he  shall  not  break  his 
word ;  he  shall  do  according  to  all  that  has  gone  out  of  his  mouth:'* 
i.e.  he  shall  keep  or  fulfil  the  vow,  and  the  promise  of  abstinence,  in 
perfect  accordance  with  his  word.  "^7r!  is  a  positive  vow,  or  promise 
to  give  or  sanctify  any  part  of  one's  property  to  the  Lord.  "iDi<, 
from  "ID5J,  to  bind  or  fetter,  the  negative  vow,  or  vow  of  abstinence. 
St't^y'hv  ist5  "ibx,  to  take  an  abstinence  upon  his  soul.  In  what 
such  abstinence  consisted  is  not  explained,  because  it  was  well 
understood  from  traditional  customs  ;  in  all  probability  it  consisted 
chiefly  in  fasting  and  other  similar  abstinence  from  lawful  things. 
The  Nazarite's  vow,  which  is  generally  reckoned  among  the  vows  of 
abstinence,  is  called  neder  in  chap.  vi.  2  sqq.,  not  issar,  because  it 
consisted  not  merely  in  abstinence  from  the  fruit  of  the  vine,  but 
also  in  the  positive  act  of  permitting  the  hair  to  grow  freely  in 
honour  of  the  Lord.     The  expression  "  swear  an  oath"  (ver.  2  ;  cf. 


224  THE  FOUETH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

ver.  13)  shows  that,  as  a  rule,  they  bound  themselves  to  abstinence 
by  an  oath.  The  inf.  constr.,  V^f*^,  is  used  here,  as  in  other  places, 
for  the  inf.  ahs.  (of.  Ges.  §  131,  4,  note  2).  hrv^  from  i'.^n,  for  ^n;, 
as  in  Ezek.  xxxix.  7  (cf.  Ges.  §  67,  note  8),  to  desecrate  (his  word), 
i.e.  to  leave  it  unfulfilled  or  break  it. — Vers.  3-15  contain  the  rules 
relating  to  positive  and  negative  vows  made  by  a  woman,  and  four 
different  examples  are  given.  The  first  case  (vers.  3-5)  is  that  of 
a  woman  in  her  youth,  while  still  unmarried,  and  living  in  her 
father's  house.  If  she  made  a  vow  of  performance  or  abstinence, 
and  her  father  heard  of  it  and  remained  silent,  it  w^as  to  stand,  i.e. 
to  remain  in  force.  But  if  her  father  held  her  back  when  he  heard 
of  it,  i.e.  forbade  her  fulfilling  it,  it  was  not  to  stand  or  remain 
in  force,  and  Jehovah  would  forgive  her  because  of  her  father's 
refusal.  Obedience  to  a  father  stood  higher  than  a  self-imposed 
religious  service, — The  second  case  (vers.  6-8)  was  that  of  a  vow  of 
performance  or  abstinence,  made  by  a  woman  before  her  marriage, 
and  brought  along  with  her  ("^^V,  "  upon  herself")  into  her  marriage. 
In  such  a  case  the  husband  had  to  decide  as  to  its  validity,  in  the 
same  way  as  the  father  before  her  marriage.  In  the  day  when  he 
heard  of  it  he  could  hold  back  his  wife,  i.e.  dissolve  her  vow ;  but 
if  he  did  not  do  this  at  once,  he  could  not  hinder  its  fulfilment 
afterwards.  '^''^SK^  ^9^P?  gossip  of  her  lips,  that  which  is  uttered 
thoughtlessly  or  without  reflection  (cf.  Lev.  v.  4).  This  expression 
implies  that  vows  of  abstinence  were  often  made  by  unmarried 
women  without  thought  or  reflection. — The  third  case  (ver.  9)  was 
that  of  a  vow  made  by  a  widow  or  divorced  woman.  Such  a  vow 
had  full  force,  because  the  woman  was  not  dependent  upon  a 
husband. — The  fourth  case  (vers.  10-12)  was  that  of  a  vow  made 
hf  a  wife  in  her  married  state.  Such  a  vow  was  to  remain  in  force 
if  her  husband  remained  silent  when  he  heard  of  it,  and  did  not 
restrain  her.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  to  have  no  force  if  her 
husband  dissolved  it  at  once.  After  this  there  follows  the  general 
statement  (vers.  13-16),  that  a  husband  could  establish  or  dissolve 
every  vow  of  performance  or  abstinence  made  by  his  wife.  If, 
however,  he  remained  silent  "  from  day  to  day,"  he  confirmed  it  by 
his  silence ;  and  if  afterwards  he  should  declare  it  void,  he  was  to 
bear  his  wife's  iniquity,  njiy^  the  sin  which  the  wife  w^ould  have 
had  to  bear  if  she  had  broken  the  vow  of  her  own  accord.  This 
consisted  either  in  a  sin-offering  to  expiate  her  sin  (Lev.  v.  4  sqq.) ; 
or  if  this  was  omitted,  in  the  punishment  which  God  suspended  over 
the  sin  (Lev.  v.  1). — Ver.  16,  concluding  formula. 


1 


CHAP.  XXXI.  1-12.  225 


WAR  OF  REVENGE  AGAINST  THE  lyilDIANITES. — CHAP.  XXXI. 

Vers.  1-12.  The  Campaign. — After  the  people  of  Israel  had 
been  mustered  as  the  army  of  Jehovah,  and  then*  future  relation 
to  the  Lord  had  been  firmly  established  by  the  order  of  sacrifice 
that  was  given  to  them  immediately  afterwards,  the  Lord  com- 
manded Moses  to  carry  out  that  hostility  to  the  Midianites  which 
had  already  been  commanded  in  chap.  xxv.  16-18.  Moses  was  to 
revenge  {i.e.  to  execute)  the  revenge  of  the  children  of  Israel  upon 
the  Midianites,  and  then  to  be  gathered  to  his  people,  i.e.  to  die,  as 
had  already  been  revealed  to  him  (chap,  xxvii.  13).  "The  revenge 
of  the  children  of  Israel "  was  revenge  for  the  wickedness  which 
the  tribes  of  the  Midianites  who  dwelt  on  the  east  of  Moab  (see  at 
chap.  xxii.  4)  had  practised  upon  the  Israelites,  by  seducing  them 
to  the  idolatrous  worship  of  Baal  Peor.  This  revenge  is  called  the 
"revenge  of  Jehovah"  inver.  3,  because  the  seduction  had  violated 
the  divinity  and  honour  of  Jehovah.  The  daughters  of  Moab  had 
also  taken  part  in  the  seduction  (chap.  xxv.  1,  2) ;  but  they  had 
done  so  at  the  instigation  of  the  Midianites  (see  p.  203),  and  not  of 
their  own  accord,  and  therefore  the  Midianites  only  were  to  atone 
for  the  wickedness. — Vers.  3-6.  To  carry  out  this  revenge,  Moses 
had  1000  men  of  each  tribe  delivered  (liD?!?  see  at  ver.  16)  from 
the  families  (alaphim,  see  chap.  i.  16)  of  the  tribes,  and  equipped 
for  war  ;  and  these  he  sent  to  the  army  (into  the  war)  along  with 
Phinehas  the  son  of  Eleazar  the  high  priest,  who  carried  the  holy 
vessels,  viz.  the  alarm-trumpets,  in  his  hand.  Phinehas  was  attached 
to  the  army,  not  as  the  leader  of  the  soldiers,  but  as  the  high  priest 
with  the  holy  trumpets  (chap.  x.  9),  because  the  war  was  a  holy 
war  of  the  congregation  against  the  enemies  of  themselves  and 
their  God.  Phinehas  had  so  distinguished  himself  by  the  zeal 
which  he  had  displayed  against  the  idolaters  (chap.  xxv.  7),  that  it 
was  impossible  to  find  any  other  man  in  all  the  priesthood  to  attach 
to  the  army,  who  would  equal  him  in  holy  zeal,  or  be  equally 
qualified  to  inspire  the  army  with  zeal  for  the  holy  conflict. 
"The  holy  vessels"  cannot  mean  the  ark  of  the  covenant  on 
account  of  the  plural,  which  would  be  inapplicable  to  it ;  nor  the 
Urim  and  Thummim,  because  Phinehas  was  not  yet  high  priest, 
and  the  expression  y3  would  also  be  unsuitable  to  these.  The 
allusion  can  only  be  to  the  trumpets  mentioned  immediately  after- 
wards, the  1  before  nnvvn  being  the  i  explic,  "  and  in  fact."  Phi- 
nehas took  these  in  his  hand,  because  the  Lord  had  assigned  them 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  r 


226  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

to  His  congregation,  to  bring  them  into  remembrance  before  Him 
in  time  of  war,  and  to  ensure  His  aid  (chap.  x.  9). — Vers.  7-10. 
Of  the  campaign  itself,  the  results  are  all  that  is  recorded.  No 
doubt  it  terminated  with  a  great  battle,  in  which  the  Midianites 
were  taken  unawares  and  completely  routed.  As  it  was  a  w^ar  of 
vengeance  of  Jehovah,  the  victors  slew  all  the  males,  i.e.  all  the 
adult  males,  as  the  sequel  shows,  without  quarter ;  and  "  upon  those 
that  were  slaiii,"  i.e,  in  addition  to  them,  the  five  Midianitish  kings 
and  Balaam,  who  first  advised  the  Midianites,  according  to  ver.  16, 
to  tempt  the  Israelites  to  idolatry.  The  five  kings  were  chiefs  of 
the  larger  or  more  powerful  of  the  Midianitish  tribes,  as  Zur  is 
expressly  said  to  have  been  in  chap.  xxv.  15.  In  Josh.  xiii.  21 
they  are  called  "  vassals  of  Sihon,"  because  Sihon  had  subjugated 
them  and  made  them  tributary  when  he  first  conquered  the  land. 
The  women  and  children  of  the  Midianites  were  led  away  prisoners ; 
and  their  cattle  {behemah,  beasts  of  draft  and  burden,  as  in  Ex. 
XX.  10),  their  flocks,  and  their  goods  taken  away  as  spoil.  The 
towns  in  their  dwellings,  and  all  their  villages  (tiroth,  tent-villages, 
as  in  Gen.  xxv.  16),  were  burnt  down.  The  expression  "  towns  in 
their  dwellings "  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  the  towns  were  not 
the  property  of  the  Midianites  themselves,  who  were  a  nomad 
people,  but  that  they  originally  belonged  in  all  probability  to  the 
Moabites,  and  had  been  taken  possession  of  by  the  Amorites  under 
Sihon.  This  is  confirmed  by  Josh.  xiii.  21,  according  to  which 
these  five  Midianitish  vassals  of  Sihon  dwelt  in  the  land,  i.e.  in 
the  kingdom  of  Sihon.  This  also  serves  to  explain  why  the  con- 
quest of  their  country  is  not  mentioned  in  the  account  before  us, 
although  it  is  stated  in  Joshua  (/.c),  that  it  was  allotted  to  the 
Reubenites  with  the  kingdom  of  Sihon. — Vers.  11,  12.  All  this 
booty  {shalal,  booty  in  goods),  and  all  the  prey  in  man  and  beast 
(malkoach),  was  brought  by  the  conquerors  to  Moses  and  Eleazar 
and  the  congregation,  into  the  camp  in  the  steppes  of  Moab.  In 
ver.  12,  ""l^  applies  to  the  women  and  children  who  were  taken 
prisoners,  b'^F?^  to  the  cattle  taken  as  booty,  and  ?^p  to  the  rest 
of  the  prey. 

Vers.  13-18.  Treatment  of  the  Prisoners. — When  Moses  went 
out  to  the  front  of  the  camp  with  Eleazar  and  the  princes  of  the 
congregation  to  meet  the  returning  warriors,  he  was  angry  with 
the  commanders,  because  they  had  left  all  the  women  alive,  since 
it  was  they  who  had  been  the  cause,  at  Balaam's  instigation,  of  the 
falling  away  of  the  Israelites  from  Jehovah  to  worship  Peor ;  and 


CHAP.  XXXI.  19-24.  227 

he  commanded  all  the  male  children  to  be  slain,  and  every  woman 
who  had  lain  with  a  man,  and  only  the  young  girls  who  had 
hitherto  had  no  connection  with  a  man  to  be  left  alive.  y\^\}  ""^pS, 
lit.  the  appointed  persons,  i.e.  the  officers  of  the  army,  who  were 
then  divided  into  princes  (captains)  over  thousands  and  hundreds. 
— "  Which  came  from  the  battle,"  i.e.  who  had  returned.  The 
question  in  ver.  15,  ^^ Have  ye  left  all  the  women  alive?"  is  an 
expression  of  dissatisfaction,  and  reproof  for  their  having  done 
this,  hv^'^ou?  .  .  .  Vn,  "  they  have  become  to  the  Israelites  to  work 
unfaithfulness  towards  Jehovah"  i.e.  they  have  induced  them  to 
commit  an  act  of  unfaithfulness  towards  Jehovah.  The  word  ">D», 
which  only  occurs  in  this  chapter,  viz.  in  vers.  5  and  16,  appears  to 
be  used  in  the  sense  of  giving,  delivering,  and  then,  like  jnj,  doing, 
making,  effecting.  On  the  fact  itself,  see  chap,  xxv.  6  sqq.  The 
object  of  the  command  to  put  all  the  male  children  to  death,  was 
to  exterminate  the  whole  nation,  as  it  could  not  be  perpetuated  in 
the  women.  Of  the  female  sex,  all  were  to  be  put  to  death  who 
had  known  the  lying  with  a  man,  and  therefore  might  possibly 
have  been  engaged  in  the  licentious  worship  of  Peor  (chap.  xxv.  2), 
to  preserve  the  congregation  from  all  contamination  from  that 
abominable  idolatry. 

Vers.  19-24.  Purification  of  the  Warriors,  the  Prisoners,  and 
the  Booty. — Moses  commanded  the  men  of  war  to  remain  for  seven 
days  outside  the  camp  of  the  congregation,  to  carry  out  upon  the 
third  and  seventh  day  the  legal  purification  of  such  persons  and 
things  as  had  been  rendered  unclean  through  contact  with  dead 
bodies.  Every  one  who  had  slain  a  soul  (person),  or  touched  one 
who  had  been  slain,  was  to  be  purified,  whether  he  were  a  warrior 
or  a  prisoner.  And  so  also  were  all  the  clothes,  articles  of  leather, 
materials  of  goats'  hair,  and  all  wooden  things. — Vers.  21-24.  To 
this  end  Eleazar,  whose  duty  it  was  as  high  priest  to  see  that  the 
laws  of  purification  were  properly  observed,  issued  fuller  instruc- 
tions with  reference  to  the  purification  of  the  different  articles,  in 
accordance  with  the  law  in  chap.  xix.  n^npsp  ^^^^n^  those  who 
came  to  the  war,  i.e.  who  went  into  the  battle  (see  at  chap.  x.  9). 
"  The  ordinance  of  the  law :"  as  in  chap.  xix.  2.  The  metal  (gold, 
silver,  copper,  tin,  lead),  all  that  usually  comes  into  the  fire,  i.e. 
that  will  bear  the  fire,  was  to  be  drawn  through  the  fire,  that  it 
might  become  clean,  and  was  then  to  be  sprinkled  with  water  of 
purification  (chap.  xix.  9) ;  but  everything  that  would  not  bear 
the  fire  was  to  be  drawn  through  water. — The  washing  of  clothes 


228  THE  FOUETH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

on  the  seventh  day  was  according  to  the  rule  laid  down  in  chap. 
xix.  19. 

Vers.  25-47.  Distribution  of  the  Booty, — God  directed  Moses, 
with  Eleazar  and  the  heads  of  the  fathers'  houses  ("  fathers "  for 
"  fathers'  houses : "  see  at  Ex.  vi.  14)  of  the  congregation,  to  take 
the  whole  of  the  booty  in  men  and  cattle,  and  divide  it  into  two 
halves :  one  for  the  men  of  war  (HDnpsn  ''b'Sri,  those  who  grasped  at  n 
war,  who  engaged  in  war),  the  other  for  the  congregation,  and  to 
levy  a  tribute  upon  it  (D?^=  "^9?^,  computatio,  a  certain  amount :  see 
Ex.  xii.  4)  for  Jehovah.  Of  the  half  that  came  to  the  warriors,  one  wk 
person  and  one  head  of  cattle  were  to  be  handed  over  to  Eleazar  the  ; 
priest  out  of  every  500  (i.e,  one-fifth  per  cent.),  as  a  heave-offering 
for  Jehovah;  and  of  the  other  half  that  was  set  apart  for  the 
children  of  Israel,  i.e.  for  the  congregation,  one  out  of  every  fifty 
{i.e.  2  per  cent.)  was  to  be  taken  for  the  Levites.  TriiJ,  laid  hold  of, 
Le,  snatched  out  of  the  whole  number  during  the  process  of  counting; 
not  seized  or  touched  by  the  lot,  as  in  1  Chron.  xxiv.  6,  as  there 
was  no  reason  for  resorting  to  the  lot  in  this  instance.  The  division 
of  the  booty  into  two  equal  halves,  one  of  which  was  given  to  the 
warriors,  and  the  other  to  the  congregation  that  had  taken  no  part  in 
the  war,  was  perfectly  reasonable  and  just.  As  the  12,000  warriors 
had  been  chosen  out  of  the  whole  congregation  to  carry  on  the  war 
on  their  behalf,  the  congregation  itself  could  properly  lay  claim  to  its 
share  of  the  booty.  But  as  the  12,000  had  had  all  the  trouble,  hard- 
ships, and  dangers  of  the  war,  they  could  very  properly  reckon  upon 
some  reward  for  their  service ;  and  this  was  granted  them  by  their 
receiving  quite  as  much  as  the  whole  of  the  congregation  which 
had  taken  no  part  in  the  war, — in  fact,  more,  because  the  warriors 
only  gave  one-fifth  per  cent,  of  their  share  as  a  thank-offering  for 
the  victory  that  had  been  granted  them,  whilst  those  who  remained 
at  home  had  to  give  2  per  cent,  of  their  share  to  Jehovah  for 
the  benefit  of  the  priests  and  Levites.  The  arrangement,  however, 
was  only  made  for  this  particular  case,  and  not  as  a  law  for  all 
times,  although  it  was  a  general  rule  that  those  who  remained  at 
home  received  a  share  of  the  booty  brought  back  by  the  warriors 
(cf.  Josh.  xxii.  8 ;  1  Sam.  xxx.  24,  2b ;  2  Mace.  viii.  28,  30).— 
Vers.  31  sqq.  The  booty,  viz.  "the  rest  of  the  booty,  which  the 
men  of  war  had  taken,"  i.e.  all  the  persons  taken  prisoners  that  had 
not  been  put  to  death,  and  all  the  cattle  taken  as  booty  that  had 
not  been  consumed  during  the  march  home,  amounted  to  675,000 
head  of  small  cattle,  72,000  oxen,  61,000  asses,  and  32,000  maidens. 


J 


CHAP.  XXXI.  48-54.  .  229 

Each  half,  therefore,  consisted  of  337,500  head  of  small  cattle, 
36,000  oxen,  30,500  asses,  and  16,000  maidens  (vers.  36  and  43-46). 
Of  the  one  half  the  priests  received  675  head  of  small  cattle,  72 
oxen,  61  asses,  and  32  maidens  for  Jehovah;  and  these  Moses 
handed  over  to  Eleazar,  in  all  probability  for  the  maintenance  of 
the  priests,  in  the  same  manner  as  the  tithes  (chap,  xviii.  26-28, 
and  Lev.  xxvii.  30-33),  so  that  they  might  put  the  cattle  into  their 
own  flocks  (chap.  xxxv.  3),  and  slay  oxen  or  sheep  as  they  required 
them,  whilst  they  sold  the  asses,  and  made  slaves  of  the  girls  ;  and 
not  in  the  character  of  a  vow,  in  which  case  the  clean  animals 
would  have  had  to  be  sacrificed,  and  the  unclean  animals,  as  well 
as  the  human  beings,  to  be  redeemed  (Lev.  xxvii.  2—13).  Of  the 
other  half,  the  Levites  received  the  fiftieth  part  (vers.  43-47),  that 
is  to  say,  6750  head  of  small  cattle,  720  oxen,  610  asses,  and  320 
girls.  The  "\y\  H^HD  ("  the  half,"  etc.),  in  ver.  42,  is  resumed  in 
ver.  47,  and  the  enumeration  of  the  component  parts  of  this  half  in 
vers.  43-46  is  to  be  regarded  as  parenthetical. 

Vers.  48-54.  Sacred  Oblations  of  the  Officers. — When  the  officers 
reviewed  the  men  of  war  who  were  "  in  their  hand,"  i.e.  who  had 
fought  the  battle  under  their  command,  and  found  not  a  single  man 
missing,  they  felt  constrained  to  give  a  practical  expression  to  their 
gratitude  for  this  miraculous  preservation  of  the  whole  of  the  men, 
by  presenting  a  sacrificial  gift  to  Jehovah ;  they  therefore  brought 
all  the  golden  articles  that  they  had  received  as  booty,  and  offered 
them  to  the  Lord  "  for  the  expiation  of  their  souls "  (see  at  Lev. 
i.  4),  namely,  with  the  feeling  that  they  were  not  worthy  of  any 
such  grace,  and  not  "  because  they  had  done  wrong  in  failing  to 
destroy  all  the  enemies  of  Jehovah"  {Knohel),  This  gift,  wdiich 
was  offered  as  a  heave-offering  for  Jehovah,  consisted  of  the  follow- 
ing articles  of  gold  :  •"I'JVVfc^,  "  ai^m-rings"  according  to  2  Sam.  i.  10 
(LXX.  '^eXiBcova ;  Suidas :  '^eXiBopat,  Koa/JLol  Trepl  rov^  /Spa'^cova'^j 
KaXovvTat  Be  jSpa^taXta)  ;  T'9?)  hands,  generally  armlets  (Gen.  xxiv. 
22,  etc.)  ;  HV^D,  signet-rings ;  h'^)V,  Jioops, — according  to  Ezek.  xvi. 
12,  ear-rings;  and  T0^3,  gold  halls  (Ex.  xxxv.  22).  They  amounted 
in  all  to  16,750  shekels;  and  the  men  of  war  had  received  their 
own  booty  in  addition  to  this.  This  gift,  presented  on  the  part  of 
the  officers,  was  brought  into  the  tabernacle  "  as  a  memorial  of  the 
children  of  Israel  before  Jehovah "  (cf.  Ex.  xxx.  16);  that  is  to 
say,  it  was  placed  in  the  treasury  of  the  sanctuary. 

The  fact  that  the  Israelites  did  not  lose  a  single  man  in  the 
battle,  is  certainly  a  striking  proof  of  the  protection  of  God ;  but  it 


230  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

is  not  so  marvellous  as  to  furnish  any  good  ground  for  calling  in 
question  the  correctness  of  the  narrative.^  The  Midianites  were 
a  nomad  tribe,  who  lived  by  rearing  flocks  and  herds,  and  therefore 
were  not  a  warlike  people.  Moreover,  they  were  probably  attacked 
quite  unawares,  and  being  unprepared,  were  completely  routed  and 
cut  down  without  quarter.  The  quantity  of  booty  brought  home  is 
also  not  so  great  as  to  appear  incredible.  Judging  from  the  32,000 
females  who  had  never  lain  with  a  man,  the  tribes  governed  by  the 
five  kings  may  have  numbered  about  130,000  or  150,000,  and  there- 
fore not  have  contained  much  more  than  35,000  fighting  men,  who 
might  easily  have  been  surprised  by  12,000  brave  warriors,  and 
entirely  destroyed.  And  again,  there  is  nothing  in  the  statement 
that  675,000  sheep  and  goats,  72,000  oxen,  and  61,000  asses  were 
taken  as  booty  from  these  tribes,  to  astonish  any  one  who  has  formed 
correct  notions  of  the  wealth  of  nomad  tribes  in  flocks  and  herds. 
The  only  thing  that  could  appear  surprising  is,  that  there  are  no 
camels  mentioned.  But  it  is  questionable,  in  the  first  place,  whether 
the  Midianites  were  in  the  habit  of  rearing  camels ;  and,  in  the 
second  place,  if  they  did  possess  them,  it  is  still  questionable  whether 
the  Israelitish  army  took  them  away,  and  did  not  rather  put  to  death 
all  that  they  found,  as  being  of  no  value  to  the  Israelites  in  their 
existing  circumstances.  Lastly,  the  quantity  of  jewellery  seized  as 
booty  is  quite  in  harmony  with  the  well-known  love  of  nomads,  and 
even  of  barbarous  tribes,  for  ornaments  of  this  kind ;  and  the  pecu- 
liar liking  of  the  Midianites  for  such  things  is  confirmed  by  the 
account  in  Judg.  viii.  26,  according  to  which  Gideon  took  as  much 
as  1700  shekels  Jn  weight  of  golden  rings  from  the  Midianites  alone, 
beside  ornaments  of  other  kinds.  If  we  take  the  golden  shekel  at 
10  thalers  (30  shillings :  see  vol.  ii.  p.  250),  the  value  of  the  orna- 
ments taken  by  the  officers  under  Moses  would  be  about  167,500 
thalers  (L. 25,125).  It  is  quite  possible  that  the  kings  and  other 
chiefs,  together  with  their  wives,  may  have  possessed  as  much  as 
this. 

^  Rosenmiiller  has  cited  an  example  from  Tacitus  (Ann.  xiii.  39),  of  the 
Romans  having  slaughtered  all  the  foe  without  losing  a  single  man  on  the  cap- 
ture of  a  Parthian  castle ;  and  another  from  Strdbo  (xvi.  1128),  of  a  battle  in 
which  1000  Arabs  were  slain,  and  only  2  Romans.  And  Hdvernick  mentions  a 
similar  account  from  the  life  of  Saladin  in  his  Introduction  (i.  2,  p.  452). 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-6.  231 

DIVISION  OF  THE  CONQUERED  LAND  BEYOND  THE  JOEDAN  AMONG 
THE  TRIBES  OF  REUBEN,  GAD,  AND  HALF-MANASSEH. — CHAP. 
XXXII. ^ 

Vers.  1-5.  Tlie  Reubenites  and  Gadites,  who  had  very  large 
flocks  and  herds,  petitioned  Moses,  Eleazar,  and  the  princes  of  the 
conc^egation,  to  give  them  the  conquered  land  of  Gilead  for  a  pos- 
session, as  a  land  that  was  peculiarly  adapted  for  flocks,  and  not  to 
make  them  pass  over  the  Jordan.  H^^D  Divy^  ''  Yery  strong,"  is  an 
apposition  introduced  at  the  close  of  the  sentence  to  give  emphasis 
to  the  11.  The  land  which  they  wished  for,  they  called  the  "  land 
of  Jaezer  (see  chap.  xxi.  32),  and  the  land  of  Gilead."  They  put 
Jaezer  first,  probably  because  this  district  was  especially  rich  in 
excellent  pasture  land.  Gilead  was  the  land  to  the  south  and  north 
of  the  Jabbok  (see  at  Deut.  iii.  10),  the  modem  provinces  of  Belka 
in  the  south  between  the  Jabbok  and  the  Arnon,  and  Jebel  Ajlun 
to  the  north  of  the  Jabbok,  as  far  as  the  Mandhur.  Ancient  Gilead 
still  shows  numerous  traces  of  great  fertility  even  in  its  present 
desolation,  covered  over  as  it  is  with  hundreds  of  ruins  of  old  towns 
and  hamlets.  Belka  is  mountainous  towards  the  north,  but  in  the 
south  as  far  as  the  Arnon  it  is  for  the  most  part  table-land ;  and  in 
the  mountains,  as  Buckingham  says,  "we  find  on  every  hand  a 
pleasant  shade  from  fine  oaks  and  wild  pistachio-trees,  whilst  the 
whole  landscape  has  more  of  a  European  character.   The  pasturage 

1  This  chapter  is  also  cut  in  pieces  by  Knobel:  vers.  1,  2,  16-19,  24,  28-30, 
and  33-38,  being  assigned  to  the  Elohist ;  and  the  remainder,  viz.  vers.  3-5, 
6-15,  20-23,  25-27,  31,  32,  and  39-42,  to  the  Jehovist.  But  as  the  supposed 
Elohistic  portions  are  fragmentary,  inasmuch  as  it  is  assumed,  for  example,  in 
ver.  19,  that  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad  had  already  asked  for  the  land  of 
the  Jordan  and  been  promised  it  by  Moses,  whereas  there  is  nothing  of  the  kind 
stated  in  vers.  1  and  2,  the  Elohistic  account  is  said  to  have  been  handed  down 
in  a  fragmentary  state.  The  main  ground  for  this  violent  hypothesis  is  the  fancy 
of  the  critic,  that  the  tribes  mentioned  could  not  have  been  so  shameless  as  to 
wish  to  remain  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Jordan,  and  leave  the  conquest  of 
Canaan  to  the  other  tribes,  and  that  the  willingness  to  help  their  brethren  to 
conquer  Canaan  which  they  afterwards  express  in  vers.  16  sqq.,  is  irreconcilable 
with  their  previous  refusal  to  do  this, — arguments  which  need  no  refutation 
for  an  unprejudiced  reader  of  the  Bible  who  is  acquainted  with  the  selfishness 
of  the  natural  heart.  The  arguments  founded  upon  the  language  employed  are 
also  all  weak.  Because  there  are  words  in  vers.  1  and  29,  which  the  critics 
pronounce  to  be  Jehovistic,  they  must  proceed,  both  here  and  elsewhere,  to 
remove  all  that  offends  them  with  their  critical  scissors,  in  order  that  they  ina,y 
uphold  the  full  force  of  their  dicta  ! 


232  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

in  Belha  is  much  better  than  it  is  anywhere  else  throughout  the 
whole  of  southern  Syria,  so  that  the  Bedouins  say,  'You  can  find 
no  country  like  Belka.'  The  oxen  and  sheep  of  this  district  are  con- 
sidered the  very  best"  (see  v.  Baumer,  Pal.  p.  82).  The  mountains 
of  Gilead  on  both  sides  of  the  Jabbok  are  covered  for  the  most  part 
with  glorious  forests  of  oak.  "  Jebel  Ajlun^^  says  Robinson  (Pal. 
App.  162),  "presents  the  most  charming  rural  scenery  that  I  have 
seen  in  Syria.  A  continued  forest  of  noble  trees,  chiefly  the  ever- 
green oak  (Sindian),  covers  a  large  part  of  it,  while  the  ground 
beneath  is  covered  with  luxuriant  grass,  which  we  found  a  foot  or 
more  in  height,  and  decked  with  a  rich  variety  of  flowers"  (see  v, 
Raumer,  ut  sup.).  This  also  applies  to  the  ancient  Basan,  which 
•  included  the  modern  plains  of  Jaulan  and  Hauran,  that  w^ere  also 
covered  over  with  ruins  of  former  towns  and  hamlets.  The  plain 
of  Hauraiiy  though  perfectly  treeless,  is  for  all  that  very  fertile,  rich 
in  corn,  and  covered  in  some  places  with  such  luxuriant  grass  that 
horses  have  great  difficulty  in  making  their  w^ay  through  it ;  for 
which  reason  it  is  a  favourite  resort  of  the  Bedouins  (BurcJchardt, 
p.  393).  "  The  whole  of  Hauran,"  says  Bitter  {Erdkunde,  xv.  pp. 
988,  989),  "  stretches  out  as  a  splendid,  boundless  plain,  between 
Hermon  on  the  west,  Jebel  Hauran  on  the  east,  and  Jebel  Ajlun 
to  the  south ;  but  there  is  not  a  single  river  in  which  there  is  water 
throughout  the  whole  of  the  summer.  It  is  covered,  however,  with 
a  large  number  of  villages,  every  one  of  which  has  its  cisterns,  its 
ponds,  or  its  hirket ;  and  these  are  filled  in  the  rainy  season,  and  by 
the  winter  torrents  from  the  snowy  Jebel  Hauran.  Wherever  the 
soil,  which  is  everywhere  black,  deep,  dark  brown,  or  ochre-coloured, 
and  remarkably  fertile,  is  properly  cultivated,  you  find  illimitable 
corn-fields,  and  chiefly  golden  fields  of  wheat,  which  furnish  Syria 
in  all  directions  with  its  principal  food.  By  far  the  larger  part  of 
this  plain,  which  was  a  luxuriant  garden  in  the  time  of  the  Romans, 
is  now  uncultivated,  waste,  and  without  inhabitants,  and  therefore 
furnishes  the  Bedouins  of  the  neighbourhood  with  the  desired  para- 
dise for  themselves  and  their  flocks."  On  its  western  slope  Jehel 
Hauran  is  covered  with  splendid  forests  of  oak,  and  rich  in  meadow 
land  for  flocks  (BurcMiardt,  pp.  152,  169,  170,  173,  358;  Wetstein, 
Beiseher.  pp.  39  sqq.  and  88).  On  the  nature  of  the  soil  of  Hauran, 
see  at  Deut.  iii.  4.  The  plain  of  Jaulan  appears  in  the  distance 
like  the  continuation  of  Hauran  {Bohinson,  App.  162)  ;  it  has  much 
bush-land  in  it,  but  the  climate  is  not  so  healthy  as  in  Hauran 
(Seetzen,  i.  pp.  353,  130,  131).     "In  general,  Hauran,  Jaulan,  el 


A 


CHAP.  XXXII.  6-15.  233 

Botthin,  el  Belka,  and  Ejlun,  are  the  paradise  of  nomads,  and  in  all 
their  wanderings  eastwards  they  find  no  pasture  like  it"  (^Seetzeii,  i. 
p.  364).  Dip?,  a  locality,  or  district,  njpp  Dipp  =  njpp  ^x  (ver. 
4),  a  district  adapted  for  grazing.  In  ver.  3  the  country  is  more 
distinctly  defined  by  the  introduction  of  the  names  of  a  number  of 
important  towns,  whilst  the  clause  "  the  country  which  the  Lord 
smote  before  the  congregation  of  Israel,"  in  which  the  defeat  of 
Sihon  is  referred  to,  describes  it  as  one  that  was  without  a  ruler, 
and  therefore  could  easily  be  taken  possession  of.  For  more  minute 
remarks  as  to  the  towns  themselves,  see  at  vers.  34  sqq.  On  the 
construction  ri&5  jn^,  see  at  Gen.  iv.  18. — The  words,  "  let  us  not  go 
over  the  Jordan^''  may  be  understood  as  expressing  nothing  more 
than  the  desire  of  the  speakers  not  to  receive  their  inheritance  on 
the  western  side  of  the  Jordan,  without  their  having  any  intention 
of  withdrawing  their  help  from  the  other  tribes  in  connection  with 
the  conquest  of  Canaan,  according  to  their  subsequent  declaration 
(vers.  16  sqq.)  ;  but  they  may  also  be  understood  as  expressing  a 
wish  to  settle  at  once  in  the  land  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  and 
leave  the  other  tribes  to  conquer  Canaan  alone.  Moses  understood 
them  in  the  latter  sense  (vers.  6  sqq.),  and  it  is  probable  that  this 
was  their  meaning,  as,  when  Moses  reproved  them,  the  speakers  did 
not  reply  that  they  had  not  cherished  the  intention  attributed  to 
them,  but  simply  restricted  themselves  to  the  promise  of  co-opera- 
tion in  the  conquest  of  Canaan.  But  even  in  this  sense  their 
request  did  not  manifest  "  a  shamelessness  that  would  hardly  be 
historically  true"  {KnoheT).  It  may  very  well  be  explained  from 
the  opinion  which  they  cherished,  and  which  is  perfectly  intelligible 
after  the  rapid  and  easy  defeat  of  the  two  mighty  kings  of  the 
Amorites,  Sihon  and  Og,  that  the  remaining  tribes  were  quite 
strong  enough  to  conquer  the  land  of  Canaan  on  the  west  of  the 
Jordan.  But  for  all  that,  the  request  of  the  Reubenites  and  Gadites 
did  indicate  an  utter  want  of  brotherly  feeling,  and  complete  in- 
difference to  the  common  interests  of  the  whole  nation,  so  that  they 
thoroughly  deserved  the  reproof  which  they  received  from  Moses. 

Vers.  6-15.  Moses  first  of  all  blames  their  want  of  brotherly 
feeling:  "  Shall  your  brethren  go  into  the  war,  and  ye  sit  here V^ 
He  then  calls  their  attention  to  the  fact,  that  by  their  disinclina- 
tion they  would  take  away  the  courage  and  inclination  of  the  other 
tribes  to  cross  over  the  Jordan  and  conquer  the  land,  and  would 
bring  the  wrath  of  God  upon  Israel  even  more  than  their  fathers 
who  were  sent  from  Kadesh  to  spy  out  the  land,  and  who  led  away 


234  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


n 


the  heart  of  the  people  into  rebellion  through  their  unfavourable 
account  of  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan,  and  brought  so  severe  a 
judgment  upon  the  congregation.  |p  ^T^^  ^""^D?  to  hold  away  the 
heart,  i.e.  render  a  person  averse  to  anything.  The  Keri  ^i^'^^^^j  as 
in  ver.  9,  is  unquestionably  to  be  preferred  to  the  Kal  |ix^iri,  in 
the  Kethih  of  ver.  7. — In  vers.  8-13,  Moses  reminds  them  of  the 
occurrences  described  in  chap.  xiii.  and  xiv.  On  the  expression, 
'^wliolly  followed  Jehovah^^  qL  chap.  xiv.  24.  The  words,  "ZTg  drove 
them  about  in  the  desert,^  caused  them  to  wander  backwards  and  for- 
wards in  it  for  forty  years,  point  back  to  chap.  xiv.  33-35. — ^Ver. 
14.  "  Behold,  ye  rise  up  instead  of  your  fathers,''  i.e.  ye  take  their 
place,  "  an  increase  (ni3"irij  from  nni ;  equivalent  to  a  brood)  of 
sinners,  to  augment  yet  the  burning  of  the  zvrath  of  Jehovah  against 
Israel.'^  ^V  nsp^  to  add  to,  or  increase. — Ver.  15.  "  If  ye  draw  back 
behind  Him,"  i.e.  resist  the  fulfilment  of  the  will  of  God,  to  bring 
Israel  to  Canaan,  "  lie  will  leave  it  (Israel)  still  longer  in  the  desert, 
and  ye  prepare  destruction  for  all  this  nation.^* 

Vers.  16-27.  The  persons  thus  reproved  came  near  to  Moses, 
and  replied,  "  We  will  build  sheep-folds  here  for  our  flocks,  and 
towns  for  our  children ;  but  we  will  equip  ourselves  hastily  (^''^^Hj 
part.  pass,  hasting)  before  the  children  of  Israel,  till  we  bring  them 
to  their  place'"*  (i.e.  to  Canaan).  |^V  Ttn^j  folds  or  pens  for  flocks, 
that  were  built  of  stones  piled  up  one  upon  another  (1  Sam.  xxiv. 
4).^  By  the  building  of  towns,  we  are  to  understand  the  rebuilding 
and  fortification  of  them.  ^1^,  the  children,  including  the  women, 
and  such  other  defenceless  members  of  the  family  as  were  in  need 
of  protection  (see  at  Ex.  xii.  37).  When  their  families  were 
secured  in  fortified  towns  against  the  inhabitants  of  the  land,  the 
men  who  could  bear  arms  would  not  return  to  their  houses  till  the 
children  of  Israel,  i.e.  the  rest  of  the  tribes,  had  all  received  their 
inheritance  :  for  they  did  not  wish  for  an  inheritance  on  the  other 
side  of  Jordan  and  farther  on,  if  ^S)  their  inheritance  was  assigned 
them  on  this  side  Jordan  towards  the  east.  The  application  of  the 
expression  V}?}J}  "'^J^P  to  the  land  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  as  well 
as  to  that  on  the  west,  points  to  a  time  when  the  Israelites  had  not 

^  According  to  Wetstein  (Reiseber.  p.  29),  it  is  a  regular  custom  with  the 
nomads  in  Leja^  to  surround  every  place,  where  they  pitch  their  tents,  with  a 
Sira^  i.e.  with  an  enclosure  of  stones  about  the  height  of  a  man,  that  the  flocks 
may  not  be  scattered  in  the  night,  and  that  they  may  know  at  once,  from  the 
noise  made  by  the  falling  of  the  smaller  stones  which  are  laid  at  the  top,  if  a 
wolf  attempts  to  enter  the  enclosure  during  the  night. 


I 


CHAP.  XXXII.  16-27.  235 

yet  obtained  a  firm  footing  in  Canaan.  At  that  time  the  land  to 
the  west  of  the  river  could  very  naturally  be  spoken  of  as  "  beyond 
the  Jordaiiy^  from  the  subjective  stand-point  of  the  historian,  who 
was  then  on  the  east  of  the  river ;  whereas,  according  to  the  ob- 
jective and  geographical  usage,  the  land  "  beyond  Jordan"  signifies 
the  country  to  the  east  of  the  river.  But  in  order  to  prevent  mis- 
understanding, in  this  particular  instance  the  expression  T!!")*n  iny  is 
defined  Ynore  precisely  as  •^'^J'JtPj  '*  towards  the  east"  when  it  is  in- 
tended to  apply  to  the  land  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan. — Vers.  20-24. 
Upon  this  declaration  Moses  absolves  them  from  all  guilt,  and  pro- 
mises them  the  desired  land  for  a  possession,  on  condition  that  they 
fulfil  their  promise;  but  he  reminds  them  again  of  the  sin  that 
they  will  commit,  and  will  have  to  atone  for,  if  their  promise  is  not 
fulfilled,  and  closes  with  the  admonition  to  build  towns  for  their 
families  and  pens  for  their  flocks,  and  to  do  what  they  have  pro- 
mised. Upon  this  they  promise  again  (vers.  25-27),  through  their 
spokesman  (as  the  singular  ">12K*5  in  ver.  25,  and  the  suffix  in  ''31K 
in  ver.  27,  clearly  show),  that  they  will  fulfil  his  command.  The 
use  of  the  expression  "  before  Jehovah,^  in  the  words,  "  go  armed 
before  Jehovah  to  war,"  in  vers.  20  and  21,  may  be  explained  from 
the  fact,  that  in  the  war  which  they  waged  at  the  command  of  their 
God,  the  Israelites  were  the  army  of  Jehovah,  with  Jehovah  in  the 
midst.  Hence  the  ark  of  the  covenant  was  taken  into  the  war,  as 
the  vehicle  and  substratum  of  the  presence  of  Jehovah  ;  whereas  it 
remained  behind  in  the  camp,  when  the  people  wanted  to  press 
forward  into  Canaan  of  their  own  accord  (chap.  xiv.  44).  But  if 
this  is  the  meaning  of  the  expression  "  before  Jehovah,"  we  may 
easily  understand  why  the  Reubenites  and  Gadites  do  not  make  use 
of  it  in  ver.  17,  namely,  because  they  only  promise  to  go  equipped 
"  before  the  children  of  Israel,"  i.e.  to  help  their  brethren  to 
conquer  Canaan.  In  ver.  32  they  also  adopt  the  expression,  after 
hearing  it  from  the  mouth  of  Moses  (ver.  20).^  D*i?J,  innocent, 
"  free  from  guilt  before  Jehovah  and  before  Israel."  By  drawing 
back  from  participation  in  the  war  against  the  Canaanites,  they 
would  not  only  sin  against  Jehovah,  who  had  promised  Canaan  to 
all  Israel,  and  commanded  them  to  take  it,  but  also  against  Israel 

^  This  completely  sets  aside  the  supposed  discrepancy  which  Knohel  adduces 
in  support  of  his  fragmentary  hypothesis,  viz.  that  the  Elohist  writes  "  before 
Israel"  in  vers.  17  and  29,  when  the  Jehovist  would  write  "  before  Jehovah,"— a 
statement  which  is  not  even  correct ;  since  we  find  "  before  Jehovah"  in  ver.  29, 
which  Knohel  is  obliged  to  erase  from  the  text  in  order  to  establish  his  assertion. 


236  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES.  ^^^^^« 

itself,  i.e,  against  the  rest  of  the  tribes,  as  is  more  fully  stated  in 
vers.  7-15.  In  ver.  22b,  "  before  Jehovah"  signifies  according  to 
the  judgment  of  Jehovah,  with  divine  approval.  Djnt?i^n  ^v^l,  "  ye 
icill  knoiv  your  sin"  which  will  overtake  (^^'9)  ^^  smite  you,  i.e.  ye 
will  have  to  make  atonement  for  them. 

Yers.  28-33.  Moses  thereupon  commanded  Eleazar,  Joshua, 
and  the  heads  of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  i.e.  the  persons  entrusted  in 
chap,  xxxiv.  17  sqq.  with  the  division  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  to 
give  the  Gadites  and  Reubenites  the  land  of  Gilead  for  a  possession, 
after  the  conquest  of  Canaan,  if  they  should  go  along  with  them 
across  the  Jordan  equipped  for  battle.  But  if  they  should  not  do 
this,  they  were  to  be  made  possessors  (i.e.  to  be  settled  ;  THX:  in  a 
passive  sense,  whereas  in  Gen.  xxxiv.  10,  xlvii.  27,  it  is  reflective, 
to  fix  oneself  firmly,  to  settle)  in  the  land  of  Canaan  along  with  the 
other  tribes.  In  the  latter  case,  therefore,  they  were  not  only  to 
receive  no  possession  in  the  land  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  but  were 
to  be  compelled  to  go  over  the  Jordan  with  their  wives  and  children, 
and  to  receive  an  inheritance  there  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  a 
schism  of  the  nation. — Ver.  31.  The  Gadites  and  Reubenites  re- 
peated their  promise  once  more  (ver.  25),  and  added  still  further 
(ver.  32)  :  "  We  will  pass  over  armed  before  Jehovah  into  the  land 
of  Canaan,  and  let  our  inheritance  be  with  us  {i.e.  remain  to  us) 
beyond  the  Jordan." — Yer.  33.  Moses  then  gave  to  the  sons  of  Gad 
and  Reuben,  and  the  half-tribe  of  Manasseh,  the  kingdom  of  Sihon 
king  of  the  Amorites,  and  Og  king  of  Bashan,  namely,  "  the  land 
according  to  its  towns,  in  (its)  districts,  (namely)  the  towns  of  the  land 
round  about,"  i.e,  the  whole  of  the  land  with  its  towns  and  the  dis- 
tricts belonging  to  them,  or  surrounding  the  towns.  It  appears 
strange  that  the  half-tribe  of  Manasseh  is  included  here  for  the 
first  time  at  the  close  of  the  negotiations,  wdiereas  it  is  not  men- 
tioned at  all  in  connection  with  the  negotiations  themselves.  This 
striking  fact  may  easily  be  explained,  however,  on  the  supposition 
that  it  was  by  the  two  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad  alone  that  the 
request  was  made  for  the  land  of  Gilead  as  a  possession ;  but  that 
when  Moses  granted  this  request,  he  did  not  overlook  the  fact,  that 
some  of  the  families  of  Manasseh  had  conquered  various  portions  of 
Gilead  and  Bashan  (ver.  39),  and  therefore  gave  these  families,  at 
the  same  time,  the  districts  which  they  had  conquered,  for  their 
inheritance,  that  the  whole  of  the  conquered  land  might  be  distri- 
buted at  once.  As  0.  v.  Gerlach  observes,  "  the  participation  of 
this  half-tribe  in  the  possession  is  accounted  for  in  ver.  39."    Moses 


CHAP.  XXXII.  34-36.  237 

restricted  himself,  however,  to  a  general  conveyance  of  the  land 
that  had  been  taken  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan  to  these  two  and  a 
half  tribes  for  their  inheritance,  without  sharing  it  amongst  them, 
or  fixing  the  boundaries  of  the  territory  of  each  particular  tribe. 
That  was  left  to  the  representatives  of  the  nation  mentioned  in  ver. 
28,  and  was  probably  not  carried  out  till  the  return  of  the  fighting 
men  belonging  to  these  tribes,  who  went  with  the  others  over  the 
Jordan.  In  the  verses  which  follow,  we  find  only  those  towns 
mentioned  which  were  fortified  by  the  tribes  of  Gad  and  Reuben, 
and  in  which  they  constructed  sheep-folds  (vers.  34-38),  and  the 
districts  which  the  families  of  Manasseh  had  taken  and  received  as 
their  possession  (vers.  39-42). 

Vers.  34-36.  The  Gadites  built,  i.e.  restored  and  fortified,  the 
following  places.  Dibon,  also  called  Dibon  Gad,  an  hour's  journey  to 
the  north  of  the  central  Arnon  (see  p.  149).  Ataroth,  probably  pre- 
served in  the  extensive  ruins  of  Attarus,  on  Jebel  Attar  us,  between 
el  Korriath  (Kureyat)  and  Mkaur,  i.e.  Machaerus  (see  Seetzen,  ii. 
p.  342).  Aroer,  not  the  Aroer  before  Rabbah,  which  was  allotted 
to  the  Gadites  (Josh.  xiii.  25),  as  v.  Raumer  supposes ;  but  the 
Aroer  of  Reuben  in  the  centre  of  the  valley  of  the  Arnon  (Josh, 
xii.  2,  xiii.  9,  16),  which  is  still  to  be  seen  in  the  ruins  of  Araai/r, 
on  the  edge  of  the  lofty  rocky  wall  which  bounds  the  Modjeb 
(BurcJchardt,  p.  633).  A  troth  Shophan :  only  mentioned  here; 
situation  unknown.  Jaezer :  probably  to  be  sought  for  in  the  ruins 
of  es  Szir,  to  the  west  of  Amman  (see  at  chap.  xxi.  32).  Joghehah : 
only  mentioned  again  in  Judg.  viii.  11,  and  preserved  in  the  ruins 
of  Jebeiha,  about  two  hours  to  the  north-west  of  Amman  (Burck- 
hardt,  p.  618  ;  Robinson,  App.  p.  168).  Beth-Nimrah,  contracted 
into  Nimrah  (ver.  3),  according  to  Josh.  xiii.  27,  in  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan,  and  according  to  the  Onomast.  (s.  v.  BrjOva^pdv)  Beth- 
amnaram,  five  Roman  miles  to  the  north  of  Libias  (Bethharam), 
now  to  be  seen  in  the  ruins  of  Nimrein  or  Nemrin,  where  the  Wady 
Sliaib  enters  the  Jordan  (BurcMiardt,  pp.  609,  661 ;  Robinson,  ii. 
p.  279),  in  a  site  abounding  in  ^ater  and  pasturage  (Seetzen,  ii. 
pp.  318,  716).  Betli-Haran,  or  Beth-Haram  (Josh.  xiii.  27)  :  Beth- 
ramphtha,  according  to  Josephus,  Ant.  xviii.  2,  1,  which  was  called 
Julias,  in  honour  of  the  wife  of  Augustus.  According  to  the  Ono- 
mast,  it  was  called  Beth-Ramtha  by  the  Syrians  (5<npT  n^a,  the  form 
of  the  Aramaean  stat.  empJiat.),  and  was  named  Livias  by  Herod 
Antipas,  in  honour  of  Livia,  the  wife  of  Augustus.  It  has  been 
preserved  in  the  ruins  of  Rameh,  not  far  from  the  mouth  of  the 


238  THE  FOUKTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Wady  Hesban  (Burckhardt,  p.  661,  and  Robinson,  ii.  305).  The 
words  '1J1  "ly^p  ^"^V  in  ver.  36  are  governed  by  ^^?!1  in  ver.  34 : 
"  they  built  them  as  fortified  cities  and  folds  for  flocks,"  i.e.  they 
fortified  them,  and  built  folds  in  them. 

Vers.  37  and  38.  The  Reuhenites  built  Heshhon,  the  capital  of 
king  Sihon  (see  chap.  xxi.  16),  which  was  allotted  to  the  tribe  of 
Reuben  (Josh.  xiii.  17),  but  relinquished  to  the  Gadites,  because  it 
was  situated  upon  the  border  of  their  territory,  and  given  up  by 
them  to  the  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  39  ;  1  Chron.  vi.  66).  It  stood  almost 
in  the  centre  between  the  Amon  and  Jabbok,  opposite  to  Jericho, 
and,  according  to  the  Onomast.j  twenty  Roman  miles  from  the 
Jordan,  where  the  ruins  of  a  large  town  of  about  a  mile  in  circum- 
ference are  still  to  be  seen,  with  deep  bricked  wells,  and  a  large 
reservoir,  bearing  the  ancient  name  of  Hesban  or  Hilsban  {Seetzen ; 
Burckhardt,  p.  623  ;  Robinson,  Pal.  ii.  278  ;  cf.  v.  Raumer,  Pal.  p. 
262 ;  2LndiRitters  Erdkunde,  xv.  p.  1176). — Elealeh:  half-an-hour's 
journey  to  the  north-east  of  Heshbon,  now  called  el  Aal,  i.e.  the 
height,  upon  the  top  of  a  hill,  from  which  you  can  see  the  whole  of 
southern  Belka ;  it  is  now  in  ruins  with  many  cisterns,  pieces  of 
wall,  and  foundations  of  houses  {Burckhardt,  p.  623). — Kirjatliaim, 
probably  to  the  south-west  of  Medeba,  where  the  ruins  of  el  Teym 
are  now  to  be  found  (see  at  Gen.  xiv.  5).  Nebo,  on  Mount  Nebo 
(see  at  chap,  xxvii.  12).  The  Onomast.  places  the  town  eight 
Roman  miles  to  the  south  of  Heshbon,  whilst  the  mountain  is  six 
Roman  miles  to  the  west  of  that  town.  Baal-Meon,  called  Beon 
in  ver.  3,  Beth-Meon  in  Jer.  xlviii.  23,  and  more  fully  Beth-Baal- 
Meon  in  Josh.  xiii.  17,  is  probably  to  be  found,  not  in  the  ruins  of 
Maein  discovered  by  Seetzen  and  Legh,  an  hour's  journey  to  the 
south-west  of  Tueme  {Teini),  and  the  same  distance  to  the  north  of 
Habbis,  on  the  north-east  of  Jebel  Attarus,  and  nine  Roman  miles 
to  the  south  of  Heshbon,  as  most  of  the  modern  commentators 
from  Rosenmuller  to  Knobel  suppose ;  but  in  the  ruins  of  Myun, 
mentioned  by  Burckhardt  (p.  624),  three-quarters  of  an  hour  to 
the  south-east  of  Heshbon,  where  we  find  it  marked  upon  Kieper£s 
and  Van  de  Veldts  maps.-^  Shibmah  (ver.  3,  Shebam),  which  was 
only  500  paces  from  Heshbon,  according  to  Jerome  (on  Isa.  xiv.  8), 

^  Although  Baal-Meon  is  unquestionably  identified  with  Maein  in  the  Onojn. 
(see  V.  Raumer,  Pal.  p.  259),  1  Chron.  v.  8  is  decidedly  at  variance  with  this. 
It  is  stated  there  that  "  Beta  dwelt  in  Aroer,  and  even  unto  Neio  and  Baal- 
Meon,"  a  statement  which  places  Baal-Meon  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Nebo, 
like  the  passage  before  us,  and  is  irreconcilable  with  the  supposition  that  it  was 


CHAP.  XXXII.  37,  38.  239 

has  apparently  disappeared,  without  leaving  a  trace  behind.^  Thus 
al4  the  places  built  by  the  Reubenites  were  but  a  short  distance 
from  Heshbon,  and  surrounded  this  capital ;  whereas  those  built  by 
the  Gadites  were  some  of  them  to  the  south  of  it,  on  the  Arnon,  and 
others  to  the  north,  towards  Rabbath-Ammon.  It  is  perfectly  obvi- 
ous from  this,  that  the  restoration  of  these  towns  took  place  before 
the  distribution  of  the  land  among  these  tribes,  without  any  regard 
to  their  possession  afterwards.  In  the  distribution,  therefore,  the 
southernmost  of  the  towns  built  by  the  Gadites,  viz.  Aroer,  Dibon, 
and  Ataroth,  fell  to  the  tribe  of  Reuben ;  and  Heshbon,  wliich 
was  built  by  the  Reubenites,  fell  to  the  tribe  of  Gad.  The  words 
DK^  nao^D,  "  changed  of  name,"  are  governed  by  1J3:  "  they  built  the 
towns  with  an  alteration  of  their  names,"  mutatis  nommihus  (for  l^p, 
in  the  sense  of  changing,  see  Zech.  xiv.  10).  There  is  not  sufficient 
ground  for  altering  the  text,  DEJ^  into  l^tJ'  (Knohet),  according  to  the 
7r€pLKVK\cofieva^  of  the  LXX.,  or  the  irepireTev^Lorfieva^  of  Symma- 
chus.  The  Masoretic  text  is  to  be  found  not  only  in  the  Chaldee, 
the  Syriac,  the  Vulgate,  and  the  Saadic  versions,  but  also  in  the 
Samaritan.  The  expression  itself,  too,  cannot  be  justly  described 
as  "  awkward,"  nor  is  it  a  valid  objection  that  the  naming  is  men- 
tioned afterwards ;  for  altering  the  name  of  a  town  and  giving  it 
a  new  name  are  not  tautological.  The  insertion  of  the  words, 
"  their  names  being  changed,"  before  Shibmah,  is  an  indication 
that  the  latter  place  did  not  receive  any  other  name.  Moreover, 
the  new  names  which  the  builders  gave  to  these  towns  did  not  con- 
tinue in  use  long,  but  were  soon  pressed  out  by  the  old  ones  again. 
"  And  they  called  by  names  the  names  of  the  towns :"  this  is  a 

identical  with  Maein  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Attarus.  In  the  case  of  Seetzen, 
however,  the  identification  of  Maein  with  Baal-Meon  is  connected  with  the  sup- 
position, which  is  now  generally  regarded  as  erroneous,  namely,  that  Nebo  is  the 
same  as  the  Jebel  Attarus.  (See,  on  the  other  hand,  Hejigstenberg,  Balaam ; 
and  Ritter^s  Erdkunde,  xv.  pp.  1187  sqq.) 

^  The  difference  in  the  forms  Shibmah^  Baal-Meon  (ver.  38),  and  Beth-Nimrah 
(ver.  36),  instead  of  SJiebam,  Beon,  and  Nimrah  (ver.  3),  is  rendered  useless  as  a 
proof  that  ver.  3  is  Jehovistic,  and  vers.  36-38  Elohistic,  from  the  simple  fact 
that  Baal-Meon  itself  is  a  contraction  of  Beth-Baal-Meon  (Josh.  xiii.  17).  If 
the  Elohist  could  write  this  name  fully  in  one  place  and  abbreviated  in  another, 
he  could  just  as  well  contract  it  still  further,  and  by  exchanging  the  labials  call 
it  Bean  ;  and  so  also  he  could  no  doubt  omit  the  Beth  in  the  case  of  Nimrah,  and 
use  the  masculine  form  Shebam  in  the  place  of  Shibmah.  The  contraction  of  the 
names  in  ver.  3  is  especially  connected  with  the  fact,  that  diplomatic  exactness 
was  not  required  for  an  historical  account,  but  that  the  abbreviated  forms  in 
common  use  were  quite  sufficient. 


240  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

roundabout  way  of  saying,  they  called  the  towns  by  (other,  or 
new)  names  :  cf.  1  Chron.  vi.  50.  • 

Vers.  39-42.  Moses  gave  the  Manassites  the  land  which  was 
conquered  by  them  ;  in  fact,  the  whole  of  the  kingdom  of  BasJian, 
including  not  only  the  province  of  BasJian,  but  the  northern  half  of 
Gilead  (see  at  chap.  xxi.  33,  34).  Of  this  the  sojis  of  MacMr  re- 
ceived Gilead,  the  modern  Jehel  Ajlun,  between  the  Jahhok  (Zerkd) 
and  the  Mandhur  (Hieromax,  Jarmuk),  because  they  had  taken  it 
and  driven  out  the  Amorites  and  destroyed  them  (see  Deut.  iii.  13). 
The  imperfects  in  ver.  39  are  to  be  understood  in  the  sense  of  plu- 
perfects, the  different  parts  being  linked  together  by  1  consec.  accord- 
ing to  the  simple  style  of  the  Semitic  historical  writings  explained 
in  the  note  on  Gen.  ii.  19,  and  the  leading  thought  being  preceded 
by  the  clauses  which  explain  it,  instead  of  their  being  logically 
subordinated  to  it.  "  The  sons  of  MacMr  went  to  Gilead  and  took 
it ,  ,  ,  .  and  Moses  gave^^  etc.,  instead  of  "  Moses  gave  Gilead  to 
the  sons  of  Machir,  who  had  gone  thither  and  taken  it .  .  .  ."  The 
words  nn  nc|*1,  "  Machir  dwelt  therein  (in  Gilead),"  do  not  point  to 
a  later  period  than  the  time  of  Moses,  but  simply  state  that  the 
Machirites  took  possession  of  Gilead.  As  soon  as  Moses  had  given 
them  the  conquered  land  for  their  possession,  they  no  doubt  brought 
their  families,  like  the  Gadites  and  Eeubenites,  and  settled  them  in 
fortified  towns,  that  they  might  dwell  there  in  safety,  whilst  the 
fighting  men  helped  the  other  tribes  to  conquer  Canaan.  13^^  signi- 
fies not  merely  "  to  dwell,"  but  literally  to  place  oneself,  or  settle 
down  {e.g.  Gen.  xxxvi.  8,  etc.),  and  is  even  applied  to  the  temporary 
sojourn  of  the  Israelites  in  particular  encampments  (chap.  xx.  1). 
— Machir  (ver.  40)  :  for  the  sons  of  Machir,  or  Machirites  (chap. 
xxvi.  29).  But  as  Gilead  does  not  mean  the  whole  of  the  land  with 
this  name,  but  only  the  northern  half,  so  the  sons  of  Machir  are  not 
the  whole  of  his  posterity,  but  simply  those  who  formed  the  family 
of  Machirites  which  bore  its  father's  name  (chap,  xx^^.  29),  i.e.  the 
seven  fathers'  houses  or  divisions  of  the  family,  the  heads  of  which 
are  named  in  1  Chron.  v.  24.  The  other  descendants  of  Machir 
through  Gilead,  who  formed  the  six  families  of  Gilead  mentioned 
in  chap.  xxvi.  29-33,  and  Josh.  xvii.  2,  received  their  inheritance 
in  Canaan  proper  (Josh.  xvii.). — Yer.  41.  The  family  of  Manasseh 
named  after  Machir  included  "  JaiV  the  son  (i.e.  descendant)  of 
Manasseh."  Jair,  that  is  to  say,  was  the  grandson  of  a  daughter 
of  Machir  the  son  of  Manasseh,  and  therefore  a  great-grandson  of 
Manasseh  on  the  mother's  side.     His  father  Sesjub  was  the  son  of 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  1-49.  241 

Hezron  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  who  had  married  a  daughter  of 
Manasseh  (1  Chron.  ii.  21,  22)  ;  so  that  Jair,  or  rather  Segub,  had 
gone  over  with  his  descendants  into  the  maternal  tribe,  contrary  to 
the  ordinary  rule,  and  probably  because  Machir  had  portioned  his 
daughter  with  a  rich  dowry  like  an  heiress.  Jair  took  possession 
of  the  whole  of  the  province  of  Argoh  in  Bashan,  Le.  in  the  plain  of 
Jaulan  and  Hauran  (Deut.  iii.  4  and  14),  and  gave  the  conquered 
towns  the  name  of  Havvotli  Jair,  i.e.  Jair's-lives  (see  at  Deut.  iii.  14). 
— Yer.  42.  Nobah,  whose  family  is  never  referred  to,  but  who  pro- 
bably belonged,  like  Jair,  to  one  of  the  families  of  Machirites,  took 
the  town  of  Kenath  and  its  daughters,  i.e.  the  smaller  towns  depen  • 
dent  upon  it  (see  chap.  xxi.  25),  and  gave  it  his  own  name  Nohali. 
The  name  has  not  been  preserved,  and  is  not  to  be  sought,  as 
Kurtz  supposes,  in  the  village  of  Nowa  (Newe),  in  Jotan,  which  is 
mentioned  by  Burckhardt  (p.  443),  and  was  once  a  town  of  half 
an  hour's  journey  in  circumference.  For  Kenath,  which  is  only 
mentioned  again  in  1  Chron.  ii.  23  as  having  been  taken  from  the 
Israelites  by  Gesur  and  Aram,  is  Kdvada,  which  Josephus  (de  bell. 
Jud.  i.  19,  2)  and  Ptolemy  speak  of  as  belonging  to  Coelesyria,  and 
Pliny  (h.  n.  5,  16)  to  Decapolis,  and  which  was  situated,  according 
to  Jerome,  "in  the  region  of  Trachonitis,  near  to  Bostra."  The 
ruins  are  very  extensive  even  now,  being  no  less  than  2  J  or  3  miles 
in  circumference,  and  containing  magnificent  remains  of  palaces 
from  the  times  of  Trajan  and  Hadrian.  It  is  on  the  western  slope 
of  Jebel  Hauran,  and  is  only  inhabited  by  a  few  families  of  Druses. 
The  present  name  is  Kanuat.  (For  descriptions,  see  Seetzen,  i.  pp. 
78  sqq. ;  Burckhardt,  pp.  157  sqq. ;  cf.  Bitter,  Erdk.) 

LIST  OF  Israel's  encampments. — chap,  xxxiii.  i-49. 

As  the  Israelites  had  ended  their  wanderings  through  the 
desert,  when  they  arrived  in  the  steppes  of  Moab  by  the  Jordan 
opposite  to  Jericho  (chap.  xxii.  1),  and  as  they  began  to  take 
possession  when  the  conquered  land  beyond  Jordan  was  portioned 
out  (chap,  xxxii.),  the  history  of  the  desert  wandering  closes  with 
a  list  of  the  stations  which  they  had  left  behind  them.  This  list 
was  written  out  by  Moses  "  at  the  command  of  Jehovah  "  (ver.  2), 
as  a  permanent  memorial  for  after  ages,  as  every  station  which 
Israel  left  behind  on  the  journey  from  Egypt  to  Canaan  "  through 
the  great  and  terrible  desert,"  was  a  memorial  of  the  grace  and 
faithfulness  with  which  the  Lord  led  His  people  safely  "in  the 

PENT. — YOL.  III.  Q 


242  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

desert  land  and  in  the  waste  howling  wilderness,  and  kept  him 
as  the  apple  of  His  eye,  as  an  eagle  fluttereth  over  her  young, 
spreadeth  abroad  her  wings,  taketh  them,  beareth  them  on  her 
wings"  (Ex.  xix.  4;  Deut.  xxxii.  10  sqq.). 

Vers.  1-15.  The  first  and  second  verses  form  the  heading : 
"  These  are  the  marches  of  the  children  of  Israel,  which  they  marched 
outj^  i.e.  the  marches  which  they  made  from  one  place  to  another, 
on  going  out  of  Egypt.  VS^  does  not  mean  a  station,  but  the 
breaking  up  of  a  camp,  and  then  a  train,  or  march  (see  at  Ex. 
xii.  37,  and  Gen.  xiii.  3).  Q0^^?>'^  (see  Ex.  vii.  4).  r^,  under  the 
guidance,  as  in  chap.  iv.  28,  and  Ex.  xxxviii.  21.  DH^i^DOP  DH^^^yiD, 
"  their  goings  out  (properly,  their  places  of  departure)  according  to 
their  marches,^  is  really  equivalent  to  the  clause  which  follows : 
"  their  marches  according  to  their  places  of  departure^  The  march 
of  the  people  is  not  described  by  the  stations,  or  places  of  en- 
campment, but  by  the  particular  spots  from  which  they  set  out. 
Hence  the  constant  repetition  of  the  word  ^Vp?5,  "  and  they  hrohe 
wpV  In  vers.  3-5,  the  departure  is  described  according  to  Ex. 
xii.  17,  37-41.  On  the  judgments  of  Jehovah  upon  the  gods  of 
Egypt,  see  at  Ex.  xii.  12.  "With  an  high  hand:"  as  in  Ex. 
xiv.  8.  —  The  places  of  encampment  from  Succoth  to  the  desert 
of  Sinai  (vers.  5—15)  agree  with  those  in  the  historical  account, 
except  that  the  stations  at  the  Red  Sea  (ver.  10)  and  those  at 
JDophkah  and  Alush  (vers.  13  and  14)  are  passed  over  there.  For 
Raemses,  see  at  Ex.  xii.  37.  Succoth  and  Etham  (Ex.  xiii.  20). 
Pihahiroth  (Ex.  xiv.  2).  "  The  wilderness  "  (ver.  8)  is  the  desert 
of  Shur,  according  to  Ex.  xv.  22.  Marah,  see  Ex.  xv.  23.  Elini 
(Ex.  XV.  27).  For  the  Red  Sea  and  the  wilderness  of  Sin,  see  Ex. 
xvi.  1.  For  Dophkah,  Alush,  and  Rephidim,  see  Ex.  xvii.  1 ;  and 
for  the  wilderness  of  Sinai,  Ex.  xix.  2. 

In  vers.  16—36  there  follow  twenty-one  names  of  places  where 
the  Israelites  encamped  from  the  time  that  they  left  the  wilderness 
of  Sinai  till  they  encamped  in  the  icilderness  of  Zin,  i.e.  Kadesh. 
The  description  of  the  latter  as  "  the  wilderness  of  Zin,  which  is 
Kadesh,'*  which  agrees  almost  word  for  word  with  Num.  xx.  1, 
and  still  more  the  agreement  of  the  places  mentioned  in  vers. 
37-49,  as  the  encampments  of  Israel  after  leaving  Kadesh  till  their 
arrival  in  the  steppes  of  Moab,  with  the  march  of  the  people  in  the 
fortieth  year  as  described  in  chap.  xx.  22-xxii.  1,  put  it  beyond  all 
doubt  that  the  encampment  in  the  wilderness  of  Zin,  i.e.  Kadesh 
(ver.  36),  is  to  be  understood  as  referring  to  the  second  arrival  in 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  1-49.  243 

Kadesh  after  the  expiration  of  the  thirty-eight  years  of  wandering 
in  the  desert  to  which  the  congregation  had  been  condemned. 
Consequently  the  twenty-one  names  in  vers.  16-36  contain  not 
only  the  places  of  encampment  at  which  the  Israelites  encamped  in 
the  second  year  of  their  march  from  Sinai  to  the  desert  of  Paran 
at  Kadesh,  whence  the  spies  were  despatched  into  Canaan,  but 
also  those  in  which  they  encamped  for  a  longer  period  during  the 
thirty-eight  years  of  punishment  in  the  wilderness.  This  view 
is  still  further  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  the  two  first  of  the  sta- 
tions named  after  the  departure  from  the  wilderness  of  Sinai,  viz. 
Kibroth-hattaavah  and  Ilazeroth,  agree  with  those  named  in  the 
historical  account  in  chap.  xi.  34  and  35.  Now  if,  according  to 
chap.  xii.  16,  when  the  people  left  Hazeroth,  they  encamped  in  the 
desert  of  Paran,  and  despatched  the  spies  thence  out  of  the  desert 
of  Zin  (chap.  xiii.  21),  who  returned  to  the  congregation  after 
forty  days  "into  the  desert  of  Paran  to  Kadesh"  (chap.  xiii.  26), 
it  is  as  natural  as  it  well  can  be  to  seek  for  this  place  of  encamp- 
ment in  the  desert  of  Paran  or  Zin  at  Kadesh  under  the  name  of 
Pithmah,  which  follows  Hazeroth  in  the  present  list  (ver.  18). 
This  natural  supposition  reaches  the  highest  degree  of  probability, 
from  the  fact  that,  in  the  historical  account,  the  place  of  en- 
campment, from  which  the  sending  out  of  the  spies  took  place,  is 
described  in  so  indefinite  a  manner  as  the  "  desert  of  Paran,"  since 
this  name  does  not  belong  to  a  small  desert,  just  capable  of  holding 
the  camp  of  the  Israelites,  but  embraces  the  whole  of  the  large 
desert  plateau  which  stretches  from  the  central  mountains  of 
Horeb  in  the  south  to  the  mountains  of  the  Amorites,  which  really 
form  part  of  Canaan,  and  contains  no  less  than  400  (?  10,000 
English)  square  miles  (see  pp.  57-8).  In  this  desert  the  Israelites 
could  only  pitch  their  camp  in  one  particular  spot,  which  is  called 
Rithmah  in  the  list  before  us  ;  whereas  in  the  historical  account  the 
passage  is  described,  according  to  what  the  Israelites  performed 
and  experienced  in  this  encampment,  as  near  to  the  southern 
border  of  Canaan,  and  is  thus  pointed  out  with  sufficient  clearness 
for  the  purpose  of  the  historical  account.  To  this  we  may  add  the 
coincidence  of  the  name  Rithmah  with  the  Wady  Abu  Retemat, 
which  is  not  very  far  to  the  south  of  Kadesh,  "  a  wide  plain  with 
shrubs  and  retem"  i.e.  broom  (Robinson,  i.  p.  279)j  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  which,  and  behind  the  chalk  formation  which  bounds 
it  towards  the  east,  there  is  a  copious  spring  of  sweet  water  called 
Ain  el  Kudeirdt,     This  spot  was  well  adapted  for  a  place  of  en- 


244  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

campment  for  Israel,  which  was  so  numerous  that  it  might  easily 
stretch  into  the  desert  of  Zin,  and  as  far  as  Kadesh. 

The  seventeen  places  of  encampment,  therefore,  that  are  men- 
tioned in  vers.  19-36  between  Hithmah  and  Kadesh,  are  the  places 
at  which  Israel  set  up  camps  during  the  thirty-seven  years  of  their 
wandering  about  in  the  desert,  from  their  return  from  Kadesh  into 
the  "  desert  of  the  way  to  the  Red  Sea  "  (chap.  xiv.  25),  till  the 
reassembling  of  the  whole  congregation  in  the  desert  of  ^in  at 
Kadesh  (chap.  xx.  1).^  Of  all  the  seventeen  places  not  a  single 
one  is  known,  or  can  be  pointed  out  with  certainty,  except  Ezion- 
geher.  Only  the  four  mentioned  in  vers.  30-33,  Moseroth,  JBene- 
Jaakan,  Hor-hagidgad,  and  Jotbathah,  are  referred  to  again,  viz.  in 
Deut.  X.  6,  7,  where  Moses  refers  to  the  divine  protection  enjoyed 
by  the  Israelites  in  their  wandering  in  the  desert,  in  these  words  : 
"  And  the  children  of  Israel  took  their  journey  from  Beeroth-hene- 
Jaakan  to  Mosera ;  there  Aaron  died,  and  there  he  was  buried.  .  .  . 
From  thence  they  journeyed  unto  Gudgodah,  and  from  Gudgodak 
to  Jothailiah,  a  land  of  water-brooks."  Of  the  identity  of  the  places 
mentioned  in  the  two  passages  there  can  be  no  doubt  whatever. 
Bene  Jaakan  is  simply  an  abbreviation  of  Beeroth-hene-Jaakan^ 
wells  of  the  children  of  Jaakan.  Now  if  the  children  of  Jaakan 
were  the  same  as  the  Horite  family  of  Jakan  mentioned  in  Gen. 

^  The  different  hypotheses  for  reducing  the  journey  of  the  Israelites  to  a 
few  years,  have  been  refuted  by  Kurtz  (iii.  §  41)  in  the  most  conclusive  manner 
possible,  and  in  some  respects  more  elaborately  than  was  actually  necessary. 
Nevertheless  Knohel  has  made  a  fresh  attempt,  in  the  interest  of  his  fragmentary 
hypothesis,  to  explain  the  twenty-one  places  of  encampment  given  in  vers. 
16-37  as  twenty-one  marches  made  by  Israel  from  Sinai  till  their  first  arrival 
at  Kadesh.  As  the  whole  distance  from  Sinai  to  Kadesh  by  the  straight  road 
through  the  desert  consists  of  only  an  eleven  days'  journey,  Knohel  endeavours 
to  bring  his  twenty-one  marches  into  harmony  with  this  statement,  by  reckon- 
ing only  five  hours  to  each  march,  and  postulating  a  few  detours  in  addition, 
in  which  the  people  occupied  about  a  hundred  hours  or  more.  The  objection 
which  might  be  raised  to  this,  namely,  that  the  Israelites  made  much  longer 
marches  than  these  on  their  way  from  Egypt  to  Sinai,  he  tries  to  set  aside  by 
supposing  that  the  Israelites  left  their  flocks  behind  them  in  Egypt,  and  pro- 
cured fresh  ones  from  the  Bedouins  at  Sinai.  But  this  assertion  is  so  arbitrary 
and  baseless  an  idea,  that  it  is  not  worth  while  to  waste  a  single  word  upon  the 
subject  (see  Ex.  xii.  38).  The  reduction  of  the  places  of  encampment  to  simple 
marches  is  proved  to  be  at  variance  with  the  text  by  the  express  statement  in 
chap.  X.  33,  that  when  the  Israelites  left  the  wilderness  of  Sinai  they  went  a 
three  days'  journey,  until  the  cloud  showed  them  a  resting-place.  For  it  is  per- 
fectly evident  from  this,  that  the  march  from  one  place  to  another  cannot  be 
understood  without  further  ground  as  being  simply  a  day's  march  of  five  hours. 


I 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  1-49.  245 

xxxvi.  27, — and  the  reading  \PV'!.  for  ]\^V\  in  1  Chron.  i.  42  seems  to 
favour  this, — the  wells  of  Jaakan  would  have  to  be  sought  for  on 
the  mountains  that  bound  the  Arahali  on  either  the  east  or  west. 
Gudgodah  is  only  a  slightly  altered  and  abbreviated  form  of  Hor- 
hagidgady  the  cave  of  Gidgad  or  Gudgodah ;  and  lastly,  Moseroth 
is  simply  the  plural  form  of  Mosera.  But  notwithstanding  the 
identity  of  these  four  places,  the  two  passages  relate  to  different 
journeys.  Deut.  x.  6  and  7  refers  to  the  march  in  the  fortieth 
year,  when  the  Israelites  went  from  Kadesh  through  the  Wady 
Murreli  into  the  Arabah  to  Mount  Hor,  and  encamped  in  the 
Arabah  first  of  all  at  the  wells  of  the  children,  and  then  at  Mosera, 
where  Aaron  died  upon  Mount  Hor,  which  was  in  the  neighbour- 
hood, and  whence  they  travelled  still  farther  southwards  to  Gud- 
godah and  Jotbathah.  In  the  historical  account  in  chap.  xx.  and 
xxi.  the  three  places  of  encampment,  Bene-Jaakan,  Gudgodah,  and 
Jotbathah,  are  not  mentioned,  because  nothing  worthy  of  note 
occurred  there.  Gudgodah  was  perhaps  the  place  of  encampment 
mentioned  in  chap.  xxi.  4,  the  name  of  which  is  not  given,  where 
the  people  were  punished  with  fiery  serpents ;  and  Jotbathah  is 
probably  to  be  placed  before  Zalmdnah  (ver.  41).  The  clause,  "  a 
land  of  water-brooks  "  (Deut.  x.  7),  points  to  a  spot  in  or  near  the 
southern  part  of  the  Arabah,  where  some  wady,  or  valley  with  a 
stream  flowing  through  it,  opened  into  the  Arabah  from  either  the 
eastern  or  western  mountains,  and  formed  a  green  oasis  through 
its  copious  supply  of  water  in  the  midst  of  the  arid  steppe.  But 
the  Israelites  had  encamped  at  the  very  same  places  once  before, 
namely,  during  their  thirty-seven  years  of  wandering,  in  which  the 
people,  after  returning  from  Kadesh  to  the  Red  Sea  through  the 
centre  of  the  great  desert  of  et  Tih,  after  wandering  about  for 
some  time  in  the  broad  desert  plateau,  went  through  the  Wady  el 
Jerafeh  into  the  Arabah  as  far  as  the  eastern  border  of  it  on  the 
slopes  of  Mount  ffor,  and  there  encamped  at  Mosera  {Moseroth) 
somewhere  near  Ain  et  Taiyibeh  (on  RobinsorCs  map),  and  then 
crossed  over  to  Bene-Jaakan,  which  was  probably  on  the  western 
border  of  the  Arabah,  somewhere  near  Ain  el  Ghamr  {Robinson), 
and  then  turning  southwards  passed  along  the  Wady  el  Jeib  by 
Hor-gidgad  {Gudgodah),  Jotbathah,  and  Abronah  to  Eziongeber  on 
the  Red  Sea ;  for  there  can  be  no  doubt  whatever,  that  the  Ezion- 
geber in  vers.  35,  36,  and  that  in  Deut.  ii.  8,  are  one  and  the  same 
town,  viz.  the  Avell-known  port  at  the  northern  extremity  of  the 
Elanitic  Gulf,  where  the  Israelites  in  the  time  of  Solomon  and 


I 

II 


246  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Jelioshaphat  built  a  fleet  to  sail  to  Ophir  (1  Kings  ix.  26,  xxii.  49). 
It  was  not  far  from  Elath  (i.e.  Akaba),  and  is  supposed  to  have  been 
"  the  large  and  beautiful  town  of  Asziun,^  which  formerly  stood,  ac- 
cording to  Makrizij  near  to  Aila,  where  there  were  many  dates,  fields, 
and  fruit-trees,  though  it  has  now  long  since  entirely  disappeared. 

Consequently  the  Israelites  passed  twice  through  a  portion  of 
the  Arabah  in  a  southerly  direction  towards  the  Red  Sea,  the 
second  time  from  Wady  Murreh  by  Mount  Hor,  to  go  round  the 
land  of  Edom,  not  quite  to  the  head  of  the  gulf,  but  only  to  the 
Wady  el  Ithm,  through  which  they  crossed  to  the  eastern  side  of 
Edomitis  (p.  142)  ;  the  first  time  during  the  thirty-seven  years  of 
wandering  from  Wady  el  Jerafeh  to  Moseroth  and  Bene  Jaakan, 
and  thence  to  Eziongeber. — Ver.  36.  "  And  they  removed  from  Ezion- 
gehevy  and  encamped  in  the  desert  of  Zin,  that  is  Kadesh : "  the  re- 
turn to  Kadesh  towards  the  end  of  the  thirty-ninth  year  is  referred 
to  here.  The  fact  that  no  places  of  encampment  are  given  between 
Eziongeber  and  Kadesh,  is  not  to  be  attributed  to  the  "  plan  of  the 
author,  to  avoid  mentioning  the  same  places  of  encampment  a  second 
time,"  for  any  such  plan  is  a  mere  conjecture  ;  but  it  may  be  simply 
and  perfectly  explained  from  the  fact,  that  on  this  return  route 
— which  the  whole  of  the  people,  with  their  wives,  children,  and 
flocks,  could  accomplish  without  any  very  great  exertion  in  ten  or 
fourteen  days,  as  the  distance  from  Aila  to  Kadesh  through  the  J I 
desert  of  Paran  is  only  about  a  forty  hours'  journey  upon  camels,  ' ' 
and  Robinson  travelled  from  Akabah  to  the  Wady  Retemath,  near 
Kadesh,  in  four  days  and  a  half — no  formal  camp  was  pitched  at  all, 
probably  because  the  time  of  penal  wandering  came  to  an  end  at 
Eziongeber,  and  the  time  had  arrived  when  the  congregation  was  to 
assemble  again  at  Kadesh,  and  set  out  thence  upon  its  journey  to  w\ 
Canaan. — Hence  the  eleven  names  given  in  vers.  19—30,  between 
Rithmah  and  Moseroth,  can  only  refer  to  those  stations  at  which  the 
congregation  pitched  their  camp  for  a  longer  or  shorter  period  U 
during  the  thirty-seven  years  of  punishment,  on  their  slow  return 
from  Kadesh  to  the  Red  Sea,  and  previous  to  their  entering  the 
Arabah  and  encamping  at  Moseroth. 

This  number  of  stations,  which  is  very  small  for  thirty-seven 
years  (only  seventeen  from  Rithmah  or  Kadesh  to  Eziongeber),  is 
a  sufficient  proof  that  the  congregation  of  Israel  was  not  constantly 
wandering  about  during  the  whole  of  that  time,  but  may  have 
remained  in  many  of  the  places  of  encampment,  probably  those 
which  furnished  an  abundant  supply  of  water  and  pasturage,  not 


I 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  1-49.  247 

only  for  weeks  and  months,  but  even  for  years,  the  people  scattering 
themselves  in  all  directions  round  about  the  place  where  the  taber- 
nacle was  set  up,  and  making  use  of  such  means  of  support  as  the 
desert  afforded,  and  assembling  together  again  when  this  was  all 
gone,  for  the  purpose  of  travelling  farther  and  seeking  somewhere 
else  a  suitable  spot  for  a  fresh  encampment.  Moreover,  the  w^ords 
of  Deut.  i.  46,  "  ye  abode  in  Kadesh  many  days,"  when  compared 
with  chap.  ii.  1,  "  then  we  turned,  and  took  our  journey  into  the 
wilderness  of  the  way  to  the  Red  Sea,"  show  most  distinctly,  that 
after  the  sentence  passed  upon  the  people  in  Kadesh  (chap,  xiv.),  they 
did  not  begin  to  travel  back  at  once,  but  remained  for  a  considerable 
time  in  Kadesh  before  going  southwards  into  the  desert.  With 
regard  to  the  direction  which  they  took,  all  that  can  be  said,  so  long 
as  none  of  the  places  of  encampment  mentioned  in  vers.  19-29  are 
discovered,  is  that  they  made  their  way  by  a  very  circuitous  route, 
and  with  many  a  wide  detour,  to  Eziongeber,  on  the  Red  Sea.^ 

Yers.  37-49.  The  places  of  encampment  on  the  journey  of  the 
fortieth  year  from  Kadesh  to  Mount  Hor,  and  round  Edom  and 
Moab  into  the  steppes  of  Moab,  have  been  discussed  at  chap.  xx. 
and  xxi.  On  Mount  Hor,  and  Aaron's  death  there,  see  at  chap.  xx. 
22,   For  the  remark  in  ver.  40  concerning  the  Canaanites  of  Arad, 

^  We  agree  so  far,  therefore,  with  the  view  adopted  by  Fries^  and  followed 
by  Kurtz  (History  of  Old  Covenant,  iii.  306-7)  and  Schultz  (Deut.  pp.  153-4), 
that  we  regard  the  stations  given  in  vers.  19-35,  between  Rithmdh  and  Ezion- 
geber^ as  referring  to  the  journeys  of  Israel,  after  its  condemnation  in  Kadesh, 
during  the  thirty-seven  years  of  its  wandering  about  in  the  desert.  But  we  do 
not  regard  the  view  which  these  writers  have  formed  of  the  marches  themselves 
as  being  well  founded,  or  in  accordance  with  the  text, — namely,  that  the  people 
of  Israel  did  not  really  come  a  second  time  in  full  procession  from  the  south  to 
Kadesh,  but  that  they  had  never  left  Kadesh  entirely,  inasmuch  as  when  the 
nation  was  rejected  in  Kadesh,  the  people  divided  themselves  into  larger  and 
smaller  groups,  and  that  portion  which  was  estranged  from  Moses,  or  rather 
from  the  Lord,  remained  in  Kadesh  even  after  the  rest  were  scattered  about ; 
BO  that,  in  a  certain  sense,  Kadesh  formed  the  standing  encampment  and 
meeting-place  of  the  congregation  even  during  the  thirty-seven  years.  Accord- 
ing to  this  view,  the  removals  and  encampments  mentioned  in  vers.  19-36  do 
not  describe  the  marches  of  the  whole  nation,  but  are  to  be  understood  as  the 
circuit  made  by  the  headquarters  during  the  thirty-seven  years,  with  Moses  at 
the  head  and  the  sanctuary  in  the  midst  {Kurtz) ^  or  else  as  showing  "  that  Moses 
and  Aaron,  with  the  sanctuary  and  the  tribe  of  Levi,  altered  their  resting-place, 
say  from  year  to  year,  thus  securing  to  every  part  of  the  nation  in  turn  the 
nearness  of  the  sanctuary,  in  accordance  with  the  signals  appointed  by  God 
(Num.  X.  11,  12),  and  thus  passed  over  the  space  between  Kadesh  and  Ezion- 
geber within  the  first  eighteen  years,  and  then,  by  a  similar  change  of  place, 


248  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

see  at  chap.  xxi.  1.  On  Zalmonah,  Phunon,  and  Oboth,  see  at  chap, 
xxi.  10 ;  on  Ijje  Aharim^  at  chap.  xxi.  11 ;  on  Dibon  Gad,  Almon 
Diblathaim,  and  the  mountains  of  Abarim,  before  Nebo,  chap.  xxi. 
16-20  (see  p.  149).     On  Arboth  Moab,  see  at  chap.  xxii.  1. 

INSTRUCTIONS  CONCERNING  THE  CONQUEST  AND  DISTRIBUTION  OF 
CANAAN. — CHAP.  XXXIII.  50-CHAP.  XXXVI.  13. 

These  instructions,  with  which  the  eves  of  the  IsraeHtes  were 
directed  to  the  end  of  all^their  wandering,  viz.  the  possession  of  the 
promised  land,  are  arranged  in  two  sections  by  longer  introduc- 
tory formulas  (chap,  xxxiii.  50  and  xxxv.  1).  The  former  contains 
the  divine  commands  (a)  with  regard  to  the  extermination  of  the 
Oanaanites  and  their  idolatry,  and  the  division  of  the  land  among 
the  tribes  of  Israel  (chap,  xxxiii.  50-56)  ;  (b)  concerning  the  boun- 
daries of  Canaan  (chap,  xxxiv.  1—15)  ;  (c)  concerning  the  men  who 
were  to  divide  the  land  (chap,  xxxiv.  16-29).  The  second  contains 
commands  (a)  respecting  the  towns  to  be  given  up  to  the  Levites 
(chap.  xxxv.  1-8) ;  (b)  as  to  the  setting  apart  of  cities  of  refuge 

gradually  drew  near  to  Kadesh  during  the  remaining  eighteen  or  nineteen  years, 
and  at  length  in  the  last  year  summoned  the  whole  nation  (all  the  congrega- 
tion) to  assemble  together  at  this  meeting-place."  Now  we  cannot  admit  that 
in  this  view  "  we  find  all  the  different  and  scattered  statements  of  the  Penta- 
teuch explained  and  rendered  intelligible."  In  the  first  place,  it  does  not  do 
justice  even  to  the  list  of  stations ;  for  if  the  constantly  repeated  expression, 
*'  and  they  (the  children  of  Israel,  ver.  1)  removed  .  .  .  and  encamped,"  denotes 
the  removal  and  encamping  of  the  whole  congregation  in  vers.  3-18  and  37-49, 
it  is  certainly  at  variance  with  the  text  to  explain  the  same  words  in  vers.  19-36 
as  signifying  the  removal  and  encamping  of  the  headquarters  only,  or  of  Moses, 
with  Aaron  and  the  Levites,  and  the  tabernacle.  Again,  in  all  the  laws  that 
were  given  and  the  events  that  are  described  as  occurring  between  the  first  halt 
of  the  congregation  in  Kadesh  (chap.  xiii.  and  xiv.)  and  their  return  thither  at 
the  commencement  of  the  fortieth  year  (chap,  xx.),  the  presence  of  the  whole 
congregation  is  taken  for  granted.  The  sacrificial  laws  in  chap,  xv.,  which 
Moses  was  to  address  to  the  children  of  Israel  (ver.  1),  were  given  to  "  the  whole 
congregation"  (cf.  vers.  24,  25,  26).  The  man  who  gathered  wood  on  the 
Sabbath  was  taken  out  of  the  camp  and  stoned  by  "all  the  congregation" 
(chap.  XV.  36).  "All  the  congregation"  took  part  in  the  rebellion  of  the 
company  of  Korah  (chap.  xvi.  19,  xvii.  6,  21  sqq.).  It  is  true  this  occurrence 
is  supposed  by  Ku7^tz  to  have  taken  place  "  during  the  halt  in  Kadesh,"  but  the 
reasons  given  are  by  no  means  conclusive  (p.  105).  Besides,  if  we  assign  every- 
thing that  is  related  in  chap,  xv.-xix.  to  the  time  when  the  whole  congregation 
abode  in  Kadesh,  this  deprives  the  hypothesis  of  its  chief  support  in  Deut.  i.  46, 
"and  ye  abode  in  Kadesh  a  long  time,  according  to  the  days  that  ye  abode." 
For  in  that  case  the  long  abode  in  Kadesh  would  include  the  period  of  the  laws 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  50-56.  249 

for  unintentional  manslayers,  and  the  course  to  be  adopted  in  rela- 
tion to  such  manslayers  (chap.  xxxv.  9-34)  ;  and  (c)  a  law  concern- 
ing the  manying  of  heiresses  within  their  own  tribes  (chap,  xxxvi.). 
— The  careful  dovetailing  of  all  these  legal  regulations  by  separate 
introductory  formulas,  is  a  distinct  proof  that  the  section  chap, 
xxxiii.  50-56  is  not  to  be  regarded,  as  Baumgarten^  Knohel,  and 
others  suppose,  in  accordance  with  the  traditional  division  of  the 
chapters,  as  an  appendix  or  admonitory  conclusion  to  the  list  of 
stations,  but  as  the  general  legal  foundation  for  the  more  minute 
instructions  in  chap,  xxxiv.-xxxvi. 

Chap,  xxxiii.  50-56.  Command  to  exterminate  the  Ca- 

NAANITES,  AND   DIVIDE   THEIR  LaND   AMONG   THE   FAMILIES   OF 

Israel. — Vers.  51-53.  When  the  Israelites  passed  through  the 
Jordan  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  they  were  to  exterminate  all  the 
inhabitants  of  the  land,  and  to  destroy  all  the  memorials  of  their 
idolatry ;  to  take  possession  of  the  land  and  dwell  therein,  for  Jeho- 
vah had  given  it  to  them  for  a  possession,  ^"y^n^  to  take  posses- 
sion of  (vers.  53,  etc.),  then  to  drive  out  of  their  possession,  to 

and  incidents  recorded  in  chap,  xv.-xix.,  and  yet,  after  all,  "the  whole  con- 
gregation "  went  away.  In  no  case,  in  fact,  can  the  words  be  understood  as 
signifying  that  a  portion  of  the  nation  remained  there  during  the  thirty-seven 
years.  Nor  can  this  be  inferred  in  any  way  from  the  fact  that  their  departure 
is  not  expressly  mentioned ;  for,  at  all  events,  the  statement  in  chap.  xx.  1, 
"and  the  children  of  Israel,  the  whole  congregation,  came  into  the  desert  of 
Zin,"  presupposes  that  they  had  gone  away.  And  the  "  inconceivable  idea,  that 
in  the  last  year  of  their  wanderings,  when  it  was  their  express  intention  to  cross 
the  Jordan  and  enter  Canaan  from  the  east,  they  should  have  gone  up  from 
Eziongeber  to  the  southern  boundary  of  Canaan,  which  they  had  left  thirty- 
seven  years  before,  merely  to  come  back  again  to  the  neighbourhood  of  Ezion- 
geber, after  failing  in  their  negotiations  with  the  king  of  Edom,  which  they 
might  have  carried  on  from  some  place  much  farther  south,  and  to  take  the 
road  from  that  point  to  the  country  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan  after  all"  {Fries), 
loses  all  the  surprising  character  which  it  apparently  has,  if  we  only  give  up  the 
assumption  upon  which  it  is  founded,  but  which  has  no  support  whatever  in  the 
biblical  history,  viz.  that  during  the  thirty-seven  years  of  their  wandering  in 
the  desert,  Moses  was  acquainted  with  the  fact  that  the  Israelites  were  to  enter 
Canaan  from  the  east,  or  at  any  rate  that  he  had  formed  this  plan  for  some 
time.  If,  on  the  contrary,  when  the  Lord  rejected  the  murmuring  nation  (chap, 
xiv.  26),  He  decided  nothing  with  reference  to  the  way  by  which  the  generation 
that  would  grow  up  in  the  desert  was  to  enter  Canaan, — and  it  was  not  till  after 
the  return  to  Kadesh  that  Moses  was  informed  by  God  that  they  were  to  advance 
nto  Canaan  from  the  east  and  not  from  the  south, — it  was  perfectly  natural  that 
when  the  time  of  punishment  had  expired,  the  Israelites  should  assemble  in 
Kadeeh  again,  and  start  from  that  point  upon  their  journey  onward. 


250  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

exterminate  (ver.  52  ;  cf.  chap.  xiv.  12,  etc.).  On  ver.  52,  see  Ex. 
xxxiv.  13.  ri"'3b^D,  an  idol  of  stone  (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  1).  ribDD  '•D^v, 
idols  cast  from  brass.  Massecali,  see  at  Ex.  xxxii.  4.  Barnoth,  altars 
of  the  Canaanites  upon  high  places  (see  Lev.  xxvi.  30). — Ver. 
54.  The  command  to  divide  the  land  by  lot  among  the  families  is 
partly  a  verbal  repetition  of  chap.  xxvi.  53-56.  'lil  "f?  «y.  "^f^'^^. : 
literally,  "into  that,  whither  the  lot  comes  out  to  him,  shall  be 
to  him"  (i.e.  to  each  family)  ;  in  other  words,  it  is  to  receive  that 
portion  of  land  to  which  the  lot  that  comes  out  of  the  urn  shall 
point  it.  "  According  to  the  tribes  of  your  fathers  :"  see  at  chap, 
xxvi.  55. — The  command  closes  in  vers.  55,  56,  with  the  threat, 
that  if  they  did  not  exterminate  the  Canaanites,  not  only  would 
such  as  were  left  become  "  thorns  in  their  eyes  and  stings  in  their 
sides,"  i.e.  inflict  the  most  painful  injuries  upon  them,  and  make 
war  upon  them  in  the  land ;  but  Jehovah  would  also  do  the  very 
same  things  to  the  Israelites  that  He  had  intended  to  do  to  the 
Canaanites,  i.e.  drive  them  out  of  the  land  and  destroy  them.  This 
threat  is  repeated  by  Joshua  in  his  last  address  to  the  assembled 
congregation  (Josh,  xxiii.  13). 

Chap,  xxxiv.  1-15.  Boundaries  of  the  Land  of  Canaan. 
— ^Ver.  2.  "  When  ye  come  into  the  land  of  Canaan^  this  shall  he  the 
land  which  loill  fall  to  you  as  an  inheritance,  the  land  of  Canaan 
according  to  its  boundaries  ;"  i.e.  ye  shall  receive  the  land  of  Canaan 
for  an  inheritance,  within  the  following  limits. — Vers.  3-5.  The 
southern  boundary  is  the  same  as  that  given  in  Josh.  xv.  2-4  as  the 
boundary  of  the  territory  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  We  have  first  the 
general  description,  "  The  south  side  shall  he  to  you  from  the  desert 
of  Zin  on  the  sides  of  Edom  onwards,^'  i.e.  the  land  was  to  extend 
towards  the  south  as  far  as  the  desert  of  Zin  on  the  sides  of  Edom. 
*'ypV,  "  on  the  sides,"  differs  in  this  respect  from  ^I'^V,  "  on  the 
side"  (Ex.  ii.  5 ;  Josh.  xv.  46 ;  2  Sam.  xv.  2),  that  the  latter  is 
used  to  designate  contact  at  a  single  point  or  along  a  short  line ;  the 
former,  contact  for  a  long  distance  or  throughout  the  whole  extent 
(=  ^T^^,  Deut.  ii.  37).  "  Oti  the  sides  of  Edom*^  signifies,  there- 
fore, that  the  desert  of  Zin  stretched  along  the  side  of  Edom,  and 
Canaan  was  separated  from  Edom  by  the  desert  of  Zin.  From 
this  it  follows  still  further,  that  Edom  in  this  passage  is  not  the 
mountains  of  Edom,  which  had  their  western  boundary  on  the 
Arabah,  but  the  country  to  the  south  of  the  desert  of  Zin  or  Wady 
Murreh  (see  p.  87),  viz.  the  mountain  land  of  the  Azazimeh,  which 


CHAP.  XXXIV.  1-15.  251 

still  bears  the  name  of  Seir  or  Ser7'  among  the  Arabs  (see  Seetzen 
and  Rowland  in  Bitter's  Erdk.  xiv.  pp.  840  and  1087).  The  state- 
ment in  Josh.  XV.  1  also  agrees  with  this,  viz.  that  Judah's  inherit- 
ance was  "  to  the  territory  of  Edom,  the  desert  of  Zin  towards  the 
south,"  according  to  which  the  desert  of  Zin  was  also  to  divide  the 
territory  of  Edom  from  that  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (see  the  remarks 
on  chap.  xiv.  45).  With  ver.  Sb  the  more  minute  description  of 
the  southern  boundary  line  commences  :  "  The  south  border'  shall  be 
from  the  end  of  the  Salt  Sea  eastward,^'  i.e.  start  from  "  the  tongue 
which  turns  to  the  south"  (Josh.  xv.  2),  from  the  southern  point  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  where  there  is  now  a  salt  marsh  with  the  salt  moun- 
tain at  the  south-west  border  of  the  lake.  '^  And  turn  to  the  south 
side  (^J^p)  of  the  ascent  of  Akrabbim"  (ascensus  scorpionum),  i.e. 
hardly  "the  steep  pass  of  es  Sufah,  1434  feet  in  height,  which 
leads  in  a  south-westerly  direction  from  the  Dead  Sea  along  the 
northern  side  of  Wady  Fikreh,  a  wady  three-quarters  of  an  hour's 
journey  in  breadth,  and  over  which  the  road  from  Petra  to  Hesh- 
bon  passes,"^  as  Knobel  maintains  ;  for  the  expression  ^DJ  (turn),  in 
ver.  4,  according  to  which  the  southern  border  turned  at  the  height 
of  Akrabbim,  that  is  to  say,  did  not  go  any  farther  in  the  direc- 
tion from  N.E.  to  S.W.  than  from  the  southern  extremity  of  the 
Salt  Sea  to  this  point,  and  was  then  continued  in  a  straight  line 
from  east  to  west,  is  not  at  all  applicable  to  the  position  of  this  pass, 
since  there  would  be  no  bend  whatever  in  the  boundary  line  at  the 
pass  of  es  Sufah,  if  it  ran  from  the  Arabah  through  Wady  Fikreh, 
and  so  across  to  Kadesh.  The  "  height  of  Akrabbim.,'^  from  which 
the  country  round  was  afterwards  called  Akrabattine,  Akrabatene 
(1  Mace.  V.  3 ;  Josephus,  Ant.  xii.  8,  1),^  is  most  probably  the  lofty 
row  of  "  white  cliffs"  of  sixty  or  eighty  feet  in  height,  which  run 
obliquely  across  the  Arabah  at  a  distance  of  about  eight  miles  below 
the  Dead  Sea  and,  as  seen  from  the  south-west  point  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  appear  to  shut  in  the  Ghor,  and  which  form  the  dividing  line 
between  the  two  sides  of  the  great  valley,  which  is  called  el  Ghor 
on  one  side,  and  el  Araba  on  the  other  (Robinson,  ii.  489,  494, 
502).     Consequently  it  was  not  the  Wady  Fikreh,  but  a  wady 

^  See  Rohinson,  vol.  ii.  pp.  587,  591 ;  and  v.  ScJmbert,  ii.  pp.  443,  447  sqq. 

2  It  must  be  distinguished,  however,  from  the  Akrabatta  mentioned  by 
Josephus  in  his  "Wars  of  the  Jews  (iii.  3,  5),  the  modern  Akrabeh  in  central 
Palestine  {Rob.  Bihl.  Res.  p.  296),  and  from  the  to-paTchj  AJcrabattene  mentioned 
in  Josephus  (Wars  of  the  Jews,  ii.  12,  4  ;  20,  4 ;  22,  2),  which  was  named  after 
this  place. 


252 


THE  FOUKTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


which  opened  into  the  Arabah  somewhat  farther  to  the  south,  pos- 
sibly the  southern  branch  of  the  Wady  Murreh  itself,  which  formed 
the  actual  boundary.  ^'  And  shall  pass  over  to  Zin"  (i.e.  the  desert 
of  Zin,  the  great  Wady  Murreh,  see  at  chap.  xiv.  21),  ^'and  its 
going  forth  shall  he  to  the  south  of  Kadesh-Barnea^^  at  the  western 
extremity  of  the  desert  of  Zin  (see  at  chap.  xx.  16).  From  this 
point  the  boundary  went  farther  out  (^^^J)  "  to  Hazar-Addar,  and 
over  (1?y)  to  Azmon^  According  to  Josh.  xv.  3,  4,  it  went  to  the 
south  of  Kadesh-Barnea  over  ("•??)  to  Hezron,  and  ascended  (^?V) 
to  Addar,  and  then  turned  to  Karkaa,  and  went  over  to  Azmon, 
Consequently  Hazar-Addar  corresponds  to  Hezron  and  Addar  (in 
Joshua)  ;  probably  the  two  places  were  so  close  to  each  other  that 
they  could  be  joined  together.  Neither  of  them  has  been  discovered 
yet.  This  also  applies  to  Karhaa  and  Azmon.  The  latter  name 
reminds  us  of  the  Bedouin  tribe  Azazimeh,  inhabiting  the  moun- 
tains in  the  southern  part  of  the  desert  of  Zin  (Eobinson,  i.  pp.  274, 
283,  287  ;  Seetzen,  iii.  pp.  45,  47).  Azmon  is  probably  to  be  sought 
for  near  the  Wady  el  Ain,  to  the  west  of  the  Hebron  road,  and  not 
far  from  its  entrance  into  the  Wady  el  Arish ;  for  this  is  "  the 
river  (brook)  of  Egypt"  to  which  the  boundary  turned  from  Azmon, 
and  through  which  it  had  "  its  outgoings  at  the  sea,"  i.e.  terminated 
at  the  Mediterranean  Sea.  The  "  brook  of  Egypt,*'  therefore,  is 
frequently  spoken  of  as  the  southern  boundary  of  the  land  of  Israel 
(1  Kings  viii.  65,  2  Kings  xxiv.  7,  2  Chron.  vii.  8,  and  Isa. 
xxvii.  12,  where  the  LXX.  express  the  name  by  ^Pcvo/copovpa). 
Hence  the  southern  boundary  ran,  throughout  its  whole  length, 
from  the  Arabah  on  the  east  to  the  Mediterranean  on  the  west, 
along  valleys  which  form  a  natural  division,  and  constitute  more  or 
less  the  boundary  line  between  the  desert  and  the  cultivated  land.^ 
Ver.  6.  The  western  boundary  was  to  be  "  the  great  sea  and  its 
territory,"  i.e.  the  Mediterranean  Sea  with  its  territory  or  coast  (cf 
Deut.  iii.  16,  17 ;  Josh.  xiii.  23,  27,  xv.  47). 

1  On  the  lofty  mountains  of  Madara^  where  the  Wady  Murreh  is  divided 
into  two  wadys  (Fikreh  and  Murreh)  which  run  to  the  Arabah,  v.  Schubert  ob- 
served "some  mimosen-trees,"  with  which,  as  he  expresses  it,  "the  vegetation 
cf  Arabia  took  leave  of  us,  as  it  were,  as  they  were  the  last  that  we  saw  on  our 
road."  And  Dieterici  (ReiseUlder^  ii.  pp.  156-7)  describes  the  mountain  ridge 
at  Nakb  es  Sufah  as  "  the  boundary  line  between  the  yellow  desert  and  green 
steppes,"  and  observes  still  further,  that  on  the  other  side  of  the  mountain  (i.e. 
northwards)  the  plain  spread  out  before  him  in  its  fresh  green  dress.  "  The 
desert  journey  was  over,  the  empire  of  death  now  lay  behind  us,  and  a  new 
life  blew  towards  us  from  fields  covered  with  green." — In  the  same  way  the 


I 


CHAP.  XXXIV.  1-15.  253 

Vers.  7-9.  The  northern  boundary  cannot  be  determined  witli 
certainty.  "  From  the  great  sea,  mark  out  to  you  (^^^^,  from  nxn 
=  njn,  to  mark  or  point  out),  i.e.  fix.  Mount  Hor  as  the  boundary^' — 
from  thence  "  to  come  to  Ham,ath;  and  let  the  goings  forth  of  the 
boundary  be  to  Zedad.  And  the  boundary  shall  go  out  to  Ziphron^ 
and  its  goings  out  be  at  Hazar-enan,^^  Of  all  these  places,  Hamath, 
the  modem  Hamah,  or  the  Epiphania  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans  on 
the  Orontes  (see  at  chap.  xiii.  21,  and  Gen.  x.  18),  is  the  only  one 
whose  situation  is  well  known ;  but  the  geographical  description  of 
the  northern  boundary  of  the  land  of  Israel  Hon  &5hp  (chap.  xiii.  21 ; 
Josh.  xiii.  5 ;  Judg.  iii.  3 ;  1  Kings  viii.  65 ;  2  Kings  xiv.  25 ;  1 
Chron.  xiii.  5 ;  2  Chron.  vii.  8 ;  Amos  vi.  14 ;  Ezek.  xlvii.  15,  20, 
xlviii.  1)  is  so  indefinite,  that  the  boundary  line  cannot  be  deter- 
mined with  exactness.  For  no  proof  can  be  needed  in  the  present 
day  that  HOn  «hp  cannot  mean  "to  Hamath"  {Ges.  thes.  i.  p.  185; 
Studer  on  Judg.  iii.  3,  and  Baur  on  Amos  vi.  2),  in  such  a  sense 
as  would  make  the  town  of  Hamath  the  border  town,  and  K3  a 

country  between  Kadesh  and  the  Hebron  road,  which  has  become  better  known 
to  us  through  the  descriptions  of  travellers,  is  described  as  a  natural  boundary. 
Seetzen,  in  his  account  of  his  journey  from  Hebron  to  Sinai  (iii.  p.  47),  observes 
that  the  mountains  of  Tih  commence  at  the  "Wady  el  Ain  (fountain-valley), 
which  takes  its  name  from  a  fountain  that  waters  thirty  date-palms  and  a  few 
small  corn-fields  {i.e.  Ain  el  Kuderat,  in  Robinson^  i.  p.  280),  and  describes  the 
country  to  the  south  of  the  small  flat  "Wady  el  Kdeis  {el  Kideise),  in  which  many 
tamarisks  grew  {i.e.  no  doubt  a  wady  that  comes  from  Kadesh,  from  which  it 
derives  its  name),  as  a  "most  dreadful  wilderness,  which  spreads  out  to  an 
immeasurable  extent  in  all  directions,  without  trees,  shrubs,  or  a  single  spot 
of  green"  (p.  50),  although  the  next  day  he  "  found  as  an  unexpected  rarity 
another  small  field  of  barley,  which  might  have  been  an  acre  in  extent"  (pp. 
52,  53).  RoUnson  (i.  pp.  280  sqq.)  also  found,  upon  the  route  from  Sinai  to 
Hebron,  more  vegetation  in  the  desert  between  the  "Wady  el  Kusaimeh  and  el  Ain 
than  anywhere  else  before  throughout  his  entire  journey  ;  and  after  passing  the 
"Wady  el  Ain  to  the  west  of  Kadesh,  he  "  came  upon  a  broad  tract  of  tolerably 
fertile  soil,  capable  of  tillage,  and  apparently  once  tilled."  Across  the  whole  of 
this  tract  of  land  there  were  long  ranges  of  low  stone  walls  visible  (called  "eZ 
Muzeiridt^''  "little  plantations,"  by  the  Arabs),  which  had  probably  served  at 
some  former  time  as  boundary  walls  between  the  cultivated  fields.  A  little 
farther  to  the  north  the  "Wady  es  Serdm  opens  into  an  extended  plain,  which 
looked  almost  like  a  meadow  with  its  bushes,  grass,  and  small  patches  of  wheat 
and  barley.  A  few  Azazimeh  Arabs  fed  their  camels  and  flocks  here.  The  land 
all  round  became  more  open,  and  showed  broad  valleys  that  were  capable  of 
cultivation,  and  were  separated  by  low  and  gradually  sloping  hills.  The  grass 
became  more  frequent  in  the  valleys,  and  herbs  were  found  upon  the  hills. 
"  "We  heard  (he  says  at  p.  283)  this  morning  for  the  first  time  the  songs  of 
many  birds,  and  among  them  the  lark." 


254 


THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


perfectly  superfluous  pleonasm.  In  all  the  passages  mentioned, 
Hamath  refers,  not  to  the  town  of  that  name  {Epiphania  on  the 
Orontes),  but  to  the  kingdom  of  Hamath,  which  was  named  aftei 
its  capital,  as  is  proved  beyond  all  doubt  by  2  Chron.  viii.  4,  w^here 
Solomon  is  said  to  have  built  store  cities  "  in  Hamath."  The  city 
of  Hamath  never  belonged  to  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  not  even  under 
David  and  Solomon,  and  was  not  reconquered  by  Jeroboam  II.,  as 
Baur  supposes  (see  my  Commentary  on  the  Books  of  Kings,  and 
Tlienius  on  2  Kings  xiv.  25).  How  far  the  territory  of  the  king- 
dom of  Hamath  extended  towards  the  south  in  the  time  of  Moses, 
and  how  much  of  it  was  conquered  by  Solomon  (2  Chron.  viii.  4), 
we  are  nowhere  informed.  We  simply  learn  from  2  Kings  xxv.  21, 
that  Eiblah  (whether  the  same  Eiblah  as  is  mentioned  in  ver.  11 
as  a  town  upon  the  eastern  boundary,  is  very  doubtful)  was  situ- 
ated in  the  land  of  Hamath  in  the  time  of  the  Chaldeans.  Now 
if  this  Eiblah  has  been  preserved  in  the  modern  Ribleh,  a  miserable 
village  on  the  Orontes,  in  the  northern  part  of  the  Bekaa,  ten  or 
twelve  hours'  journey  to  the  south-west  of  Hums,  and  fourteen 
hours  to  the  north  of  Baalbek  (jRohinson,  iii.  p.  461,  App.  176,  and 
Bibl.  Eesearches,  p.  544),  tlie  land  of  Canaan  would  have  reached 
a  little  farther  northwards,  and  almost  to  Hums  {Emesa).  Knohel 
moves  the  boundary  still  farther  to  the  north.  He  supposes  Mount 
Hor  to  be  Mons  Casius,  to  the  south-west  of  Antioch,  on  the  Orontes, 
and  agrees  with  Robinson  (iii.  461)  in  identifying  Zedad,  in  the 
large  village  of  Zadad  {Sudud  in  Bob,),  which  is  inhabited  ex- 
clusively by  Syriac  Christians,  who  still  speak  Syriac  according  to 
Seetzen  (i.  32  and  279),  a  town  containing  about  3000  inhabitants 
(Wetstein,  Beiseber.  p.  88),  to  the  south-east  of  Hums,  on  the  east 
of  the  road  from  Damascus  to  Hunes,  a  short  day's  journey  to  the 
north  of  JVebk,  and  four  (or,  according  to  Van  de  Velde^s  memoir, 
from  ten  to  twelve)  hours'  journey  to  the  south  of  Hasya  {Bobinson, 
iii.  p.  461 ;  Bitter,  Erdk,  xvii.  pp.  1443-4).  Ziphron,  which  was 
situated  upon  the  border  of  the  territory  of  Hamath  and  Damascus, 
if  it  is  the  same  as  the  one  mentioned  in  Ezek.  xlvii.  16,  is  supposed 
by  Knohel  and  Wetstein  (p.  88)  to  be  preserved  in  the  ruins  of 
Zifran,  which  in  all  probability  have  never  been  visited  by  any 
European,  fourteen  hours  to  the  north-east  of  Damascus,  near  to 
the  road  from  Palmyra.  Lastly,  Hazar-enan  (equivalent  to  foun- 
tain-court) is  supposed  to  be  the  station  called  Centum  Butea  (TIovTea 
in  Btol.  V.  15,  24),  mentioned  in  the  Tabul.  Beuting.  x.  3,  on  the 
road  from  Apamia  to  Balmyra,  twenty-seven  miles,  or  about  eleven 


CHAP.  XXXIV.  1-15.  255 

hourSj  to  the  north-west  of  Palmyra. — But  we  may  say  with  cer- 
tainty that  all  these  conclusions  are  incorrect,  because  they  are 
irreconcilable  with  the  eastern  boundary  described  in  vers.  10,  11. 
For  example,  according  to  vers.  10,  11,  the  Israelites  were  to  draw 
(fix)  the  eastern  boundary  " from  Hazar-enan  to  Sliepham"  which, 
as  Knohel  observes,  "  cannot  be  determined  with  exactness,  but  was 
farther  south  than  Hazar-enan,  as  it  was  a  point  on  the  eastern 
boundary  which  is  traced  here  from  north  to  south,  and  also  farther 
west,  as  we  may  infer  from  the  allusion  to  Riblah,  probably  at  the 
northern  end  of  Antilibanus"  (?).  From  Shepham  the  boundary 
was  "  to  go  doion  to  Riblah^^  which  Knohel  finds  in  the  Rihleh  men- 
tioned above.  Now,  if  we  endeavour  to  fix  the  situation  of  these 
places  according  to  the  latest  and  most  trustworthy  maps,  the  in- 
correctness of  the  conclusions  referred  to  becomes  at  once  apparent. 
From  Zadad  (Sudad)  to  Zifran,  the  line  of  the  northern  boundary 
would  not  have  gone  from  west  to  east,  but  from  north  to  south, 
or  rather  towards  the  south-west,  and  from  Zifran  to  Centum  Putea 
still  more  decidedly  in  a  south-westerly  direction.  Consequently 
the  northern  boundary  would  have  described  a  complete  semicircle, 
commencing  in  the  north-west  and  terminating  in  the  south-east. 
But  if  even  in  itself  this  appears  very  incredible,  it  becomes  per- 
fectly impossible  when  we  take  the  eastern  boundary  into  considera- 
tion. For  if  this  went  down  to  the  south-west  from  Hazar-enan 
to  Shepham  according  to  Knohel! s  conclusions,  instead  of  going 
down  (ver.  11)  from  Shepham  to  Rihlah,  it  would  have  gone  up 
six  or  seven  geographical  miles  from  south  to  north,  and  then  have 
gone  down  again  from  north  to  south  along  the  eastern  coast  of  the 
Lake  of  Gennesareth.  Now  it  is  impossible  that  Moses  should  have 
fixed  such  a  boundary  to  the  land  of  Israel  on  the  north-east,  and 
equally  impossible  that  a  later  Hebrew,  acquainted  with  the  geo- 
graphy of  his  country,  should  have  described  it  in  this  way. 

If,  in  order  to  obtain  a  more  accurate  view  of  the  extent  of  the 
land  towards  the  north  and  north-east,  we  compare  the  statements 
of  the  book  of  Joshua  concerning  the  conquered  land  with  the 
districts  which  still  remained  to  be  taken  at  the  time  of  the  distri- 
bution ;  Joshua  had  taken  the  land  "  from  the  bald  mountain  which 
ascends  towards  Seir,"  i.e.  probably  the  northern  ridge  of  the  Azazi- 
meh  mountains,  with  its  white  masses  of  chalk  (Fries,  ut  sup.  p.  76 ; 
see  also  at  Josh.  xi.  17),  "  to  Baal-Gad,  in  the  valley  of  Lebanon, 
below  Mount  Hermoii"  (Josh.  xi.  17  ;  cf.  chap.  xii.  7).  But  Baal- 
Gad  in  the  valley  (nVi'^H)  of  Lebanon  is  not  Heliopolis  (now  BaaU 


256 


THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


hek  in  the  BeJcaa,  or  Coelesyria),  as  many,  from  Iken  and  J.  I). 
Michaelis  down  to  Knobel,  suppose ;  for  "  the  Bekaa  is  not  under 
the  Hermon,^'  and  "  there  is  no  proof,  or  even  probability,  that 
Joshua's  conquests  reached  so  far,  or  that  Baalbek  was  ever  regarded 
as  the  northern  boundary  of  Palestine,  nor  even  that  the  adjoining 
portion  of  Anti-Lebanon  was  ever  called  Hermon"  (Robinson,  Bibli- 
cal Researches,  p.  409).  Baal-Gad,  which  is  called  Baal-Hermon  in 
Judg.  iii.  3  and  1  Ghron.  v.  23,  was  the  later  Paneas  or  Ccesarea 
Philippi,  the  modern  Banias,  at  the  foot  of  the  Hermon  (cf.  v. 
Raumer,  Pal.  p.  245  ;  Roh.  Bibl.  Res.  pp.  408-9,  Pal.  iii.  pp.  347 
sqq.).  This  is  placed  beyond  all  doubt  by  1  Chron.  v.  23,  according 
to  which  the  Manassites,  who  were  increasing  in  numbers,  dwelt 
"  from  Bashan  to  Baal-Hermon,  and  Senir,  and  the  mountains  of 
Hermon,"  since  this  statement  proves  that  Baal-Hermon  was  be- 
tween Bashan  and  the  mountains  of  Hermon.  In  harmony  with 
this,  the  following  places  in  the  north  of  Canaan  are  mentioned  in 
Josh.  xiii.  4,  5,  and  Judg.  iii.  3,  as  being  left  unconquered  by 
Joshua : — (1.)  "  All  the  land  of  the  Canaanites  {Le.  of  the  Phoeni- 
cians who  dwelt  on  the  coast),  and  the  cave  of  the  Sidonians  to 
Aphek ;"  '^'^yp,  probably  the  spelunca  inexpugnahilis  in  territorio 
Sidoniensi,  quce  vulgo  dicitur  cavea  de  Tyrum  {Willi.  Tyr.  xix. 
11),  the  present  Mughr  Jezzin,  i.e.  caves  of  Jezzin,  to  the  east  of 
Sidon  upon  Lebanon  (Ritter,  Erdh  xvii.  pp.  99,  100) ;  and  Aphek, 
probably  the  modern  Afka,  to  the  north-east  of  Beirut  {Robinson, 
Bibl.  Res.).  (2.)  "  The  land  of  the  Griblites;'  i.e.  the  territory  of 
Byblos,  and  "  all  Lebanon  towards  the  east,  from  Baal-Gad  below 
Hermon,  till  you  come  to  Hamath,"  i.e.  not  Antilibanus,  but 
Lebanon,  which  lies  to  the  east  of  the  land  of  the  Giblites.  The 
land  of  the  Giblites,  or  territory  of  Gebal,  which  is  cited  here  as 
the  northernmost  district  of  the  unconquered  land,  so  that  its 
northern  boundary  must  have  coincided  with  the  northern  boundary 
of  Canaan,  can  hardly  have  extended  to  the  latitude  of  Tripoli, 
but  probably  only  reached  to  the  cedar  grove  at  Bjerreh,  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  which  the  highest  peaks  of  the  Lebanon  are 
found.  The  territory  of  the  tribes  of  Asher  and  Naphtali  (Josh. 
xix.  24—39)  did  not  reach  farther  up  than  this.  From  all  these 
accounts,  we  must  not  push  the  northern  boundary  of  Canaan  as 
far  as  the  Eleutherus,  Nahr  el  Kebir,  but  must  draw  it  farther  to 
the  south,  across  the  northern  portion  of  the  Lebanon  ;  so  that  we 
may  look  for  Ilazar-enan  (fountain-court),  which  is  mentioned  as 
the  end  of  the  northern  boundary,  and  the  starting-point  of  the 


CHAP.  XXXIV.  1-15.  257 

eastern,  near  the  fountain  of  Lehweli.  This  fountain  forms  the 
water-shed  in  the  Bekaa,  between  the  Orontes,  which  flows  to  the 
north,  and  the  Leontes,  which  flows  to  the  south  (cf.  Bohinson,  Bibl. 
Ees.  p.  531),  and  is  not  only  a  very  large  fountain  of  the  finest 
clear  water,  springing  at  different  points  from  underneath  a  broad 
piece  of  coarse  gravel,  which  lies  to  the  west  of  a  vein  of  limestone, 
but  the  whole  of  the  soil  is  of  such  a  character,  that  "  you  have 
only  to  dig  in  the  gravel,  to  get  as  many  springs  as  you  please." 
The  quantity  of  water  which  is  found  here  is  probably  even  greater 
than  that  at  the  Anjar.  In  addition  to  the  four  principal  streams, 
there  are  three  or  four  smaller  ones  (Robinson,  Bibl.  Res.  p.  532),  so 
that  this  place  might  be  called,  with  perfect  justice,  by  the  name  of 
fountain-court.  The  probability  of  this  conjecture  is  also  consider- 
ably increased  by  the  fact,  that  the  Ain,  mentioned  in  ver.  11  as  a 
point  upon  the  eastern  boundary,  can  also  be  identified  without  any 
difficulty  (see  at  ver.  11). 

Vers.  10-12.  The  Eastern  Boundary. — If  we  endeavour  to  trace 
the  upper  line  of  the  eastern  boundary  from  the  fountain-place  just 
mentioned,  it  ran  from  Hazar-enan  to  ShepJiam,  the  site  of  which 
is  unknown,  and  "  from  ShepJiam  it  was  to  go  down  to  Bihlah,  on 
the  east  of  ^m"  (the  fountain).  The  article  "^^^l^),  and  still  more 
the  precise  description,  "  to  the  east  of  Ain,  the  fountain,  or  fountain 
locality"  (Knohel),  show  plainly  that  this  Bihlah  is  to  be  distin- 
guished from  the  Bihlah  in  the  land  of  Hamath  (2  Kings  xxiii.  33, 
XXV.  21 ;  Jer.  xxxix.  9,  Hi.  27),  with  which  it  is  mostly  identified. 
Ain  is  supposed  to  be  "  the  great  fountain  of  Neha  Anjar,  at  the 
foot  of  Antilibanus,  which  is  often  called  Birket  Anjar,  on  account 
of  its  taking  its  rise  in  a  small  reservoir  or  pool "  {Bohinson,  Bibl. 
Res.  p.  498),  and  near  to  which  Mej-del-Anjar  is  to  be  seen,  con- 
sisting of  "  the  ruins  of  the  walls  and  towers  of  a  fortified  town,  or 
rather  of  a  large  citadel"  {Bohinson,  p.  496;  cf.  Bitter,  xvii.  pp. 
181  sqq.).^  From  this  point  the  boundary  went  farther  down,  and 
pressed  ip^"^)  "  upon  the  shoulder  of  the  lake  of  Chinnereth  towards 
the  east,"  i.e.  upon  the  north-east  shore  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee  (see 
Josh.  xix.  35).  Hence  it  ran  down  along  the  Jordan  to  the  Salt 
Sea  (Dead  Sea).  According  to  these  statements,  therefore,  the 
eastern  boundary  went  from  Bekaa  along  the  western  slopes  of 

^  Knohel  regards  Ain  as  the  source  of  the  Orontes,  i.e.  Neha  Lehweh,  and 
yet,  notwithstanding  this,  identifies  Rihlah  with  the  village  of  Ribleh  mentioned 
above.  But  can  this  Rihleh^  which  is  at  least  eight  hours  to  the  north  of  Neha 
Lehweli,  be  described  as  on  the  east  of  Aiii,  i.e.  Neha  Lehweh  f 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  R 


258  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Antilibanus,  over  or  past  Rasheya  and  Bani/as,  at  the  foot  of 
Hermon,  along  the  edge  of  the  mountains  which  bound  the  Huleh 
basin  towards  the  east,  down  to  the  north-east  corner  of  the  Sea  of 
GaHlee ;  so  that  Hermon  itself  (Jebel  es  Sheikh)  did  not  belong  to 
the  land  of  Israel. — Vers.  13-15.  This  land,  according  to  the  boun- 
daries thus  described,  the  Israelites  were  to  distribute  by  lot  (chap. 
xxvi.  56),  to  give  it  to  the  nine  tribes  and  a  half,  as  the  tribes  of 
Reuben,  Gad,  and  half  Manasseh  had  already  received  their  inherit- 
ance on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan  (chap,  xxxii.  33  sqq.). 

Vers.  16-29.  List  of  the  Men  appointed  to  distribute 
THE  Land. — In  addition  to  Eleazar  and  Joshua,  the  former  of 
whom  was  to  stand  at  the  head  as  high  priest,  in  accordance  with  the 
divine  appointment  in  chap,  xxvii.  21,  and  the  latter  to  occupy  the 
second  place  as  commander  of  the  army,  a  prince  was  selected  from 
each  of  the  ten  tribes  who  were  interested  in  the  distribution,  as 
Reuben  and  Gad  had  nothing  to  do  with  it.  Of  these  princes, 
namely  heads  of  fathers'  houses  of  the  tribes  (Josh.  xiv.  1),  not 
heads  of  tribes  (see  at  chap.  xiii.  2),  Caleb,  who  is  well  known  from 
chap,  xiii.,  is  the  only  one  whose  name  is  known.  The  others  are 
not  mentioned  anywhere  else.  The  list  of  tribes,  in  the  enumeration 
of  their  princes,  corresponds,  with  some  exceptions,  to  the  situation 
of  the  territory  which  the  tribes  received  in  Canaan,  reckoning  from 
south  to  north,  and  deviates  considerably  from  the  order  in  which 
the  lots  came  out  for  the  different  tribes,  as  described  in  Josh. 
15-19.  ''HJ  in  the  Kal,  in  vers.  17  and  18,  signifies  to  give  for  an 
inheritance,  just  as  in  Ex.  xxxiv.  8,  to  put  into  possession.  There 
is  not  sufficient  ground  for  altering  the  Kal  into  Piel,  especially  as 
the  Piel  in  ver.  29  is  construed  with  the  accusative  of  the  person,  and 
with  the  thing  governed  by  n ;  whereas  in  ver.  17  the  Kalis  construed 
with  the  person  governed  by  ^,  and  the  accusative  of  the  thing. 

Chap.  XXXV.  1-8.  Appointment  of  Towns  for  the  Levites. 

— As  the  Levites  were  to  receive  no  inheritance  of  their  own,  Le, 
no  separate  tribe-territory,  in  the  land  of  Canaan  (chap,  xviii.  20 
and  23),  Moses  commanded  the  children  of  Israel,  i.e.  the  rest  of 
the  tribes,  in  accordance  with  the  divine  instructions,  to  give  (vacate) 
towns  to  the  Levites  to  dwell  in  of  the  inheritance  that  fell  to  them 
for  a  possession,  with  pasturage  by  the  cities  round  about  them  for 
their  cattle.  "  Towns  to  dwell  in,"  i.e.  not  the  whole  of  the  towns 
as  their  own  property,  but  as  many  houses  in  the  towns  as  sufficed 


I 


I 


CHAP.  XXXV.  1-8. 


259 


for  the  necessities  of  the  Levites  as  their  hereditary  possession, 
■which  could  be  redeemed,  if  sold  at  any  time,  and  which  reverted 
to  them  without  compensation  in  the  year  of  jubilee,  even  if  not 
redeemed  before  (Lev.  xxv.  32,  33)  ;  but  any  portion  of  the  towns 
which  was  not  taken  possession  of  by  them,  together  with  the  fields 
and  villages,  continued  the  property  of  those  tribes  to  which  they 
had  been  assigned  by  lot  (cf.  Josh.  xxi.  12,  and  my  commentary  on 
this  passage :  also  Bdhr,  Symbolih,  ii.  p.  50 ;  Eivald,  Gesch.  ii.  p. 
403).  They  were  also  to  give  them  ^^^  (from  tri3^  to  drive,  drive 
out),  pasturage  or  fields,  to  feed  their  flocks  upon,  all  round  the 
cities ;  and  according  to  Lev.  xxv.  34,  this  was  not  to  be  sold,  but 
to  remain  the  eternal  possession  of  the  Levites.  Dripnnp,  for  their 
oxen  and  beasts  of  burden,  and  ^^^Ic*?  for  their  (remaining)  pos- 
sessions in  flocks  (sheep  and  goats),  which  are  generally  described  in 
other  cases  as  mikneh,  in  distinction  from  behemah  (e.g.  chap,  xxxii. 
26 ;  Gen.  xxxiv.  23,  xxxvi.  G).  Dn*n"737,  and  for  all  their  animals, 
is  merely  a  generalizing  summary  signifying  all  the  animals  which 
they  possessed. — ^Ver.  4.  The  pasture  lands  of  the  different  towns 
were  to  measure  ^^  from  the  town  wall  outwards  a  thousand  cubits 
round  about"  i.e.  on  each  of  the  four  sides.  "  And  measure  from 
without  the  city^  the  east  side  2000  cubits,  and  the  south  side  2000 
cubits,  and  the  west  side  2000  cubits,  and  the  north  side  2000  cubits, 
and  the  city  in  the  middle,'^  i.e.  so  that  the  town  stood  in  the  middle 
of  the  measured  lines,  and  the  space  which  they  occupied  was  not 
included  in  the  2000  cubits.  The  meaning  of  these  instructions, 
which  have  caused  great  perplexity  to  commentators,  and  have 
latterly  been  explained  by  Saalschutz  (Mos.  R.  pp.  100,  101)  in  a 


Fig. 


Fig.  &. 


1000  c.  1000  c 


s. 


marvellously  erroneous  manner,  was  correctly  expounded  by  J.  D. 
Michaelis  in  the  notes  to  his  translation.   We  must  picture  the  towns 


260  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

and  the  surrounding  fields  as  squares,  the  pasturage  as  stretching 
1000  cubits  from  the  city  wall  in  every  direction,  as  the  accompany- 
ing figures  show,  and  the  length  of  each  outer  side  as  2000  cubits, 
apart  from  the  length  of  the  city  wall :  so  that,  if  the  town  itself 
occupied  a  square  of  1000  cubits  (see  fig.  a),  the  outer  side  of  the 
town  fields  would  measure  2000  + 1000  cubits  in  every  direction ; 
but  if  each  side  of  the  city  wall  was  only  500  cubits  long  (see 
fig.  6),  the  outer  side  of  the  town  fields  would  measure  2000  +  500 
cubits  in  every  direction. — Vers.  6-8.  Of  these  cities  which  were 
given  up  to  the  Levites,  six  were  to  serve  as  cities  of  refuge  (see  at 
vA*.  12)  for  manslayers,  and  in  addition  to  these  (C^Hv^,  over  upon 
them)  the  Israelites  were  to  give  of  their  possessions  forty-two  others, 
that  is  to  say,  forty-eight  in  all ;  and  they  were  to  do  this,  giving 
much  from  every  tribe  that  had  much,  and  little  from  the  one 
which  had  little  (chap.  xxvi.  54).  With  the  accusatives  C3''lVn  rifcf 
and  ^7?  ^^  ^^  (ver.  6),  the  writer  has  already  in  his  mind  the  verbs 
^snn  and  ^lO"'Vpn  of  ver.  8,  where  he  takes  up  the  object  again  in  the 
word  D''">V'!}1.  According  to  Josh,  xxi.,  the  Levites  received  nine 
cities  in  the  territory  of  Judah  and  Simeon,  four  in  the  territory  of 
each  of  the  other  tribes,  with  the  exception  of  Naphtali,  in  which 
there  were  only  three,  that  is  to  say,  ten  in  the  land  to  the  east  of 
the  Jordan,  and  thirty-eight  in  Canaan  proper,  of  which  the  thirteen 
given  up  by  Judah,  Simeon,  and  Benjamin  were  assigned  to  the 
families  of  the  priests,  and  the  other  thirty-five  to  the  three  Levi- 
tical  families.  This  distribution  of  the  Levites  among  all  the  tribes 
— by  which  the  curse  of  division  and  dispersion  in  Israel,  which 
had  been  pronounced  upon  Levi  in  Jacob's  blessing  (Gen.  xlix.  7), 
was  changed  into  a  blessing  both  for  the  Levites  themselves  and 
also  for  all  Israel — was  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  election  and 
destination  of  this  tribe.  Called  out  of  the  whole  nation  to  be  the 
peculiar  possession  of  Jehovah,  to  watch  over  His  covenant,  and 
teach  Israel  His  rights  and  His  law  (Deut.  xxxiii.  9, 10  ;  Lev.  x.  11 ; 
Deut.  xxxi.  9—13),  the  Levites  were  to  form  and  set  forth  among 
all  the  tribes  the  eKkoyri  of  the  nation  of  Jehovah's  possession,  and 
by  their  walk  as  well  as  by  their  calling  to  remind  the  Israelites 
continually  of  their  own  divine  calling ;  to  foster  and  preserve  the 
law  and  testimony  of  the  Lord  in  Israel,  and  to  awaken  and  spread 
the  fear  of  God  and  piety  among  all  the  tribes.  Whilst  their 
distribution  among  all  the  tribes  corresponded  to  this  appointment, 
the  fact  that  they  were  not  scattered  in  all  the  towns  and  villages 
of  the  other  tribes,  but  were  congregated  together  in  separate  towns 


CHAP.  XXXV.  9-34.  261 

among  the  different  tribes,  preserved  them  from  the  disadvantages 
of  standing  alone,  and  defended  them  from  the  danger  of  moral 
and  spiritual  declension.  Lastly,  in  the  number  forty-eight,  the 
quadrupling  of  the  number  of  the  tribes  (twelve)  is  unmistakeable. 
Now,  as  the  number  four  is  the  seal  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  the 
world,  the  idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God  is  also  represented  in  the 
four  times  twelve  towns  (cf.  Bdhr^  Symholik,  ii.  pp.  50,  51). 

Vers.  9-34.  Selection  and  Appointment  of  Cities  of 
Eefuge  for  unpremeditated  Manslayers. — Vers.  10,  11. 
When  the  Israelites  had  come  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  they  were 
to  choose  towns  conveniently  situated  as  cities  of  refuge,  to  which 
the  manslayer,  who  had  slain  a  person  (nephesJi)  by  accident  (^J^^?  : 
see  at  Lev.  iv.  2),  might  flee.  'TJi?'!',  from  ^']\>,  to  hit,  occuriit,  as 
well  as  accidit,  signifies  here  to  give  or  make,  Le.  to  choose  some- 
thing suitable  (Dietrich),  but  not  "  to  build  or  complete"  (Knobel), 
in  the  sense  of  i^*]?,  as  the  only  meaning  which  this  w^ord  has  is 
contignare,  to  join  with  beams  or  rafters ;  and  this  is  obviously  un- 
suitable here.  Through  these  directions,  which  are  repeated  and 
still  further  expanded  in  Deut.  xix.  1—13,  God  fulfilled  the  promise 
which  He  gave  in  Ex.  xxi.  13  :  that  He  w^ould  appoint  a  place  for 
the  man  who  should  unintentionally  slay  his  neighbour,  to  which 
he  might  flee  from  the  avenger  of  blood. — Vers.  12-15.  These 
towns  were  to  serve  for  a  refuge  from  the  avenger  of  blood,  that 
the  manslayer  might  not  die  before  he  had  taken  his  trial  in  the 
presence  of  the  congregation.     The  number  of  cities  was  fixed  at 

"^ix,  three  on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan,  and  three  on  this  side  in 
the  land  of  Canaan,  to  v/hich  both  the  children  of  Israel,  and  also 
the  foreigners  and  settlers  who  were  dwelling  among  them,  might 
flee.  In  Deut.  xix.  3  sqq.,  Moses  advises  the  congregation  to  pre- 
pare (r?n)  tlie  w^ay  to  these  cities,  and  to  divide  the  territory  of  the 
land  -which  Jehovah  would  give  them  into  three  parts  (^?^),  i-e, 
to  set  apart  a  free  city  in  every  third  of  the  land,  that  every  man- 
slayer might  flee  thither,  i.e.  might  be  able  to  reach  the  free  city 
without  being  detained  by  length  of  distance  or  badness  of  road, 

Jest,  as  is  added  in  ver.  6,  the  avenger  of  blood  pursue  the  slayer 
while  his  heart  is  hot  (t^n]',,  imperf.  Kal  of  0?^),  and  overtake  him 
because  the  way  is  long,  and  slay  him  (K'S:  nan  ^  as  in.Gen.  xxxvii.  21), 
whereas  he  was  not  worthy  of  death  (i.e.  there  was  no  just  ground 
for  putting  him  to  death),  "  because  he  had  not  done  it  out  of 
hatred."    The  three  cities  of  refuge  on  the  other  side  were  selecte^i 


262    ^  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

by  Moses  himself  (Deut.  iv.  41-43)  ;  the  three  in  Canaan  were  not 

appointed  till  the  land  was  distributed  among  the  nine  tribes  and  a 

Tialf  (Josh.  XX.  7).     Levitical  or  priests'  towns  were  selected  for  all 

""sTx,  not  only  because  it  was  to  the  priests  and  Levites  that  they 

would  first  of  all  look  for  an  administration  of  justice  (Schultz  on 

Deut.  xix.  3),  but  also  on  the  ground  that  these  cities  were  the 

property  of  Jehovah^  in  a  higher  sense  than  the  rest  of  the  land, 

and  for  this  reason  answered  the  idea  of  cities  of  refuge,  where  the 

manslayer,  when  once  received,  was  placed  under  the  protection  of 

divine  grace,  better  than  any  other  places  possibly  could. 

The  establishment  of  cities  of  refuge  presupposed  the  custom 
and  right  of  revenge.  The  custom  itself  goes  back  to  the  very 
earliest  times  of  the  human  race  (Gen.  iv.  15,  24,  xxvii.  45)  ;  it 
prevailed  among  the  Israelites,  as  well  as  the  other  nations  of  anti- 
quity, and  still  continues  among  the  Arabs  in  unlimited  force  (cf . 
Niebuhr,  Arab.  pp.  32  sqq. ;  Burckhardt,  Beduinen,  119,  251  sqq.). 
"  Revenge  of  blood  prevailed  almost  everywhere,  so  long  as  there 
was  no  national  life  generated,  or  it  was  still  in  the  first  stages  of  its 
development ;  and  consequently  the  expiation  of  any  personal  viola- 
tion of  justice  was  left  to  private  revenge,  and  more  especially  to 
family  zeal"  (Oehler  in  Herzog's  B.  Cycl.,  where  the  proofs  may  be 
seen).  The  warrant  for  this  was  the  principle  of  retribution,  the 
jus  taUonis,  which  lay  at  the  foundation  of  the  divine  order  of  the 
world  in  general,  and  the  Mosaic  law  in  particular,  and  which  was 
sanctioned  by  God,  so  far  as  murder  was  concerned,  even  in  the 
time  of  Noah,  by  the  command,  "  Whoso  sheddeth  man's  blood," 
etc.  (Gen.  ix.  5,  6).  This  warrant,  however,  or  rather  obligation  to 
avenge  murder,  was  subordinated  to  the  essential  principle  of  the 
theocracy,  under  the  Mosaic  law.  Whilst  God  Himself  would 
avenge  the  blood  that  was  shed,  not  only  upon  men,  but  upon 
animals  also  (Gen.  ix.  5),  and  commanded  blood-revenge.  He  with- 
drew the  execution  of  it  from  subjective  caprice,  and  restricted  it 
to  cases  of  premeditated  slaying  or  murder,  by  appointing  cities  of 
refuge,  which  were  to  protect  the  manslayer  from  the  avenger,  until 
he  took  his  trial  before  the  congregation,  p^},  redeemer,  is  "  that 
particular  relative  whose  special  duty  it  was  to  restore  the  violated  _ 
family  integrity,  whoTiad  to  redeem  not  only  landed  property  that 
had  been  alienated  from  the  family  (Lev.  xxv.  25  sqq.),  or  a  mem- 
ber of  the  family  that  had  fallen  into  slavery  (Lev.  xxv.  47  sqq.), 
but  also  the  blood  that  had  been  taken  away  from  the  family  by 
murder"  (Oehler),    In  the  latter  respect  he  was  called  D'nn  i'^i. 


CHAP.  XXXV.  9-34.  263 

(vers.  19,  21,  24  sqq. ;  Deut.  xix.  6,  12).  From  2  Sam.  xiv.  7, 
we  may  see  that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  whole  family  to  take  care 
that  blood-revenge  was  carried  out.  The  performance  of  the  duty 
itself,  however,  was  probably  regulated  by  the  closeness  of  the  rela- 
tionship, and  corresponded  to  the  duty  of  redeeming  from  bondage 
(Lev.  XXV.  49),  and  to  the  right  of  inheritance  (chap,  xxvii.  8 
sqq.).  What  standing  before  the  congregation  was  to  consist  of, 
is  defined  more  fully  in  what  follows  (vers.  24,  25).  If  we  com- 
pare with  this  Josh.  xx.  4  sqq.,  the  manslayer,  who  fled  from  the 
avenger  of  blood  into  a  free  city,  was  to  stand  before  the  gates 
of  the. city,  and  state  his  cause  before  the  elders.  They  were 
then  to  receive  him  into  the  city,  and  give  him  a  place  that  he 
might  dwell  among  them,  and  were  not  to  deliver  him  up  to  the 
avenger  of  blood  till  he  had  stood  before  the  congregation  for  judg- 
ment. Consequently,  if  the  slayer  of  a  man  presented  himself  with 
the  request  to  be  received,  the  elders  of  the  free  city  had  to  make 
a  provisional  inquiry  into  his  case,  to  decide  whether  they  should 
grant  him  protection  in  the  city ;  and  then  if  the  avenger  of  blood 
appeared,  they  w^ere  not  to  deliver  up  the  person  whom  they  had 
received,  but  to  hand  him  over,  on  the  charge  of  the  avenger  of 
blood,  to  the  congregation  to  whom  he  belonged,  or  among  whom 
the  act  had  taken  place,  that  they  might  investigate  the  case,  and 
judge  whether  the  deed  itself  was  wilful  or  accidental. 

Special  instructions  are  given  in  vers.  16-28,  with  reference  to 
the  judicial  procedure.  First  of  all  (vers.  16-21),  with  regard  to 
qualified  slaying  or  murder.  If  any  person  has  struck  another 
with  an  iron  instrument  (an  axe,  hatchet,  hammer,  etc.),  or  "  ivith  a 
stone  of  the  hand,  from  which  one  dies^^  i.e.  with  a  stone  which  filled 
the  hand, — a  large  stone,  therefore,  with  which  it  was  possible  to 
kill, — or  "  with  a  wooden  instrument  of  the  hand,  from  which  one  dies" 
i.e.  with  a  thick  club,  or  a  large,  strong  wooden  instrument,  and  he 
then  died  (so  that  he  died  in  consequence),  he  was  a  murderer,  who 
was  to  be  put  to  death.  "  For  the  suspicion  would  rest  upon  any 
one  who  had  used  an  instrument,  that  endangered  life  and  therefore 
was  not  generally  used  in  striking,  that  he  had  intended  to  take 
life  away"  (Knobel). — Ver.  19.  The  avenger  of  blood  could  put 
him  to  death,  when  he  hit  upon  him,  i.e.  whenever  and  wherever 
he  met  with  him. — Ver.  20.  And  so  also  the  man.  who  hit  another 
in  hatred,  or  threw  at  him  by  lying  in  wait,  or  struck  him  with  the 
hand  in  enmity,  so  that  he  died.  And  if  a  murderer  of  this  kind 
fled  into  a  free  city,  the  elders  of  his  city  were  to  have  him  fetched 


264  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

out  and  delivered  up  to  the  avenger  of  blood  (Deut.  xix.  11,  12). 
Then  follow,  in  vers.  22-28,  the  proceedings  to  be  taken  with  an 
unintentional  manslayer,  viz.  if  any  one  hit  another  "  in  the  mo- 
ment," i.e.  suddenly,  unawares  (chap.  vi.  9),  without  enmity,  or  by 
throwing  anything  upon  him,  without  lying  in  wait,  or  by  letting  a 
stone,  by  which  a  man  might  be  killed,  fall  upon  him  without  seeing 
him,  so  that  he  died  in  consequence,  but  without  being  his  enemy, 
or  watching  to  ao  him  harm.  In  using  the  expression  |3X"732,  the 
writer  had  probably  ^yK'n  still  in  his  mind ;  but  he  dropped  this 
word,  and  wrote  i'3*l  in  the  form  of  a  fresh  sentence.  The  thing 
intended  is  explained  still  more  clearly  in  Deut.  xix.  4,  5.  Instead 
of  VnSB,  we  find  there  nyi  723,  without  knowing,  unintentionally. 
The  words,  "  without  being  his  enemy,"  are  paraphrased  there  by, 
"  without  hating  him  from  yesterday  and  the  day  before  yesterday  " 
(i.e.  previously),  and  are  explained  by  an  example  taken  from  the 
life :  "  When  a  man  goeth  into  the  wood  with  his  neighbour  to  hew 
woody  and  his  hand  fetcheth  a  stroke  with  the  axe  to  cut  down  the  tree^ 
and  the  iron  sUppeth  (/^^  Niphal  of  ?^^)  from  the  wood  (handle),  and 
lighteth  upon  his  neighbour J^ — ^Vers.  24,  25.  In  such  a  case  as  this, 
the  congregation  was  to  judge  between  the  slayer  and  the  avenger 
of  blood,  according  to  the  judgments  before  them.  They  were  to 
rescue  the  innocent  man  from  the  avenger  of  blood,  to  bring  him 
back  to  his  (i.e.  the  nearest)  city  of  refuge  to  which  he  had  fled, 
that  he  might  dwell  there  till  the  death  of  the  high  priest,  who  had 
been  anointed  with  the  holy  oil. — ^Vers.  26-28.  If  he  left  the  city 
of  refuge  before  this,  and  the  avenger  of  blood  got  hold  of  him,  and 
slew  him  outside  the  borders  (precincts)  of  the  city,  it  was  not  to  be 
reckoned  to  him  as  blood  (D^^  Sh  pK,  like  D^»"n  )h  ]%  Ex.  xxii.  1).  But 
after  the  death  of  the  high  priest  he  might  return  "  into  the  land  of  his 
possession,"  i.e.  his  hereditary  possession  (cf .  Lev.  xxvii.  22),  sc.  with 
out  the  avenger  of  blood  being  allowed  to  pursue  him  any  longer. 

In  these  regulations  "  all  the  rigour  of  the  divine  justice  is  mani- 
fested in  the  most  beautiful  concord  with  His  compassionate  mercy. 
Through  the  destruction  of  life,  even  when  not  wilful,  human 
Llood  had  been  shed,  and  demanded  expiation.  Yet  this  expiation 
3id  not  consist  in  the  death  of  the  offender  himself,  because  he  had 
not  sinned  wilfully."  Hence  an  asylum  was  provided  for  him  in 
the  free  city,  to  which  he  might  escape,  and  where  he  would  lie 
concealed.  This  sojourn  in  the  free  city  was  not  to  be  regarded  as 
banishment,  although  separation  from  house,  home,  and  family  was 
certainly  a  punishment ;  but  it  was  a  concealment  under  "  the  pro- 


i 


CHAP.  XXXV.  9-34.  265 

tection  of  the  mercy  of  God,  which  opened  places  of  escape  in  the 
"cities  of  refuge  from  the  carnal  ardour  of  the  avenger  of  blood, 
where  the  slayer  remained  concealed  until  his  sin  was  expiated  by 
the  death  of  the  high  priest."  For  the  fact,  that  the  death  of  the 
high  priest  was  hereby  regarded  as  expiatory,  as  many  of  the  Rab- 
bins, fathers,  and  earlier  commentators  maintain  (see  my  Comm. 
on  Joshua,  p.  448),  is  unmistakeably  evident  from  the  addition 
of  the  clause,  "  who  has  been  anointed  with  the  holy  oil,"  which 
would  appear  unmeaning  and  superfluous  on  any  other  view.  This 
clause  points  to  the  inward  connection  between  the  return  of  the 
slayer  and  the  death  of  the  high  priest.  "  The  anointing  with  the 
holy  oil  was  a  symbol  of  the  communication  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  by 
which  the  high  priest  was  empowered  to  act  as  mediator  and  repre- 
sentative of  the  nation  before  God,  so  that  he  alone  could  carry  out 
the  yearly  and  general  expiation  for  the  whole  nation,  on  the  great 
day  of  atonement.  But  as  his  life  and  work  acquired  a  representa- 
tive signification  through  this  anointing  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  his 
death  might  also  be  regarded  as  a  death  for  the  sins  of  the  people, 
by  virtue  of  the  Holy  Ghost  imparted  to  him,  through  which  the 
unintentional  manslayer  received  the  benefits  of  the  propitiation  for 
his  sin  before  God,  so  that  he  could  return  cleansed  to  his  native 
town,  without  further  exposure  to  the  vengeance  of  the  avenger  of 
blood"  (Comm.  on  Joshua,  p.  448).  But  inasmuch  as,  according 
to  this  view,  the  death  of  the  high  priest  had  the  same  result  in  a 
certain  sense,  in  relation  to  his  time  of  office,  as  his  function  on  the 
day  of  atonement  had  had  every  year,  "  the  death  of  the  earthly  high 
priest  became  thereby  a  type  of  that  of  the  heavenly  One,  who, 
through  the  eternal  (holy)  Spirit,  offered  Himself  without  spot  to 
God,  that  we  might  be  redeemed  from  our  transgressions,  and  re- 
ceive the  promised  eternal  inheritance  (Heb.  ix.  14,  15).  Just  as 
the  blood  of  Christ  wrought  out  eternal  redemption,  only  because 
through  the  eternal  Spirit  He  offered  Himself  without  spot  to  God, 
so  the  death  of  the  high  priest  of  the  Old  Testament  secured  the 
complete  deliverance  of  the  manslayer  from  his  sin,  only  because  he 
had  been  anointed  with  the  holy  oil,  the  symbol  of  the  Holy  Ghost " 
(p.  449). 

If,  therefore,  the  confinement  of  the  unintentional  manslayer  in 
the  city  of  refuge  was  neither  an  ordinary  exile  nor  merely  a  means 
of  rescuing  him  from  the  revenge  of  the  enraged  goel,  but  an  ap- 
pointment of  the  just  and  merciful  God  for  the  expiation  of  human 
blood  even  though  not  wilfully  shed,  that,  whilst  there  was  no  vio- 


266 


THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


lation  of  judicial  righteousness,  a  barrier  might  be  set  to  the  un- 
righteousness of  family  revenge ;  it  was  necessary  to  guard  against 
any  such  abuse  of  this  gracious  provision  of  the  righteous  God,  as 
that  into  which  the  heathen  right  of  asylum  had  degenerated^ 
T?he  instructions  which  foUow  in  vers.  29-34  were  intended  to' 
secure  this  object.  In  ver.  29,  there  is  first  of  all  the  general 
law,  that  these  instructions  (those  given  in  vers.  11-28)  were  to  b< 
for  a  statute  of  judgment  (see  chap,  xxvii.  11)  for  all  future  ages 
("  throughout  your  generations,"  see  Ex.  xii.  14,  20).  Then,  in 
ver.  30,  a  just  judgment  is  enforced  in  the  treatment  of  murder. 
"  Whoso  killeth  any  person  (these  words  are  construed  absolutely), 
at  the  mouth  (the  testimony)  of  icitnesses  shall  the  murderer  be  put  to 
death ;  and  one  witness  shall  not  answer  (give  evidence)  against  a  per- 
son to  die ; "  Le.  if  the  taking  of  life  were  in  question,  capital  punish- 
ment was  not  to  be  inflicted  upon  the  testimony  of  one  person  only, 
but  upon  that  of  a  plurality  of  witnesses.  One  witness  could  not 
only  be  more  easily  mistaken  than  several,  but  would  be  more  likely 
to  be  partial  than  several  persons  who  were  unanimous  in  bearing 
witness  to  one  and  the  same  thing.  The  number  of  witnesses  was 
afterwards  fixed  at  two  witnesses,  at  least,  in  the  case  of  capital 
crimes  (Deut.  xvii.  6),  and  two  or  three  in  the  case  of  every  crime 
(Dent.  xix.  15 ;  cf.  John  viii.  17,  2  Cor.  xiii.  1,  Heb.  x.  28). — 
Lastly  (vers.  31  sqq.),  the  command  is  given  not  to  take  redemption 
money,  either  for  the  life  of  the  murderer,  who  was  a  wicked  man 
to  die,  Le,  deserving  of  death  (such  a  man  was  to  be  put  to  death)  ; 
nor  ^'  for  fleeing  into  the  city  of  refuge^  to  return  to  dwell  in  the  land 
till  the  death  of  the  high  priest :  "  that  is  to  say,  they  were  neither  to 
allow  the  wilful  murderer  to  come  to  terms  with  the  relative  of  the 
man  who  had  been  put  to  death,  by  the  payment  of  a  redemption 
fee,  and  so  to  save  his  life,  as  is  not  unfrequently  the  case  in  the 
East  at  the  present  day  (cf.  Robinson,  Pal.  i.  p.  209,  and  Lane's 
Manners  and  Customs)  ;  nor  even  to  allow  the  unintentional  mur- 
derer to  purchase  permission  to  return  home  from  the  city  of  refuge 

^  On  the  asrjla^  in  general,  see  Winer^s  Real-  Worterhuch^  art.  Freistatt ; 
Pauly,  Real-encykl.  der  class.  Alterthums-wissenschaft,  Bd.  i.  s.  v.  Asylum ;  but 
more  especially  K.  Dann,  "  iiber  den  Ur sprung  des  AsylrecTits  und  dessen  SchicJcsale 
und  Ueberreste  in  Europa,"  in  his  Ztschr.fUr  deuisches  Recht,  Lpz.  1840.  "  The 
asyla  of  the  Greeks^  Romans^  and  Germans  differed  altogether  from  those  of  the 
Hebrews ;  for  whilst  the  latter  were  never  intended  to  save  the  wilful  criminal 
from  the  punishment  he  deserved,  but  were  simply  established  for  the  purpose 
of  securing  a  just  sentence,  the  former  actually  answered  the  purpose  of  rescu- 
ing the  criminal  from  the  punishment  which  he  legally  deserved." 


CHAP.  XXXVI.  1-4  267 

before  the  death  of  the  high  priest,  by  the  payment  of  a  money 
compensation. — Yer.  33.  The  IsraeUtes  were  not  to  desecrate  their 
land  by  sparing  the  murderer ;  as  blood,  i.e.  bloodshed  or  murder, 
desecrated  the  land,  and  there  was  no  expiation  ("'S^'')  to  the  land 
for  the  blood  that  was  shed  in  it,  except  through  the  blood  of  the 
man  who  had  shed  it,  i.e.  through  the  execution  of  the  murderer,  by 
which  justice  would  be  satisfied. — Yer.  34.  And  they  were  not  to 
desecrate  the  land  in  which  they  dwelt  by  tolerating  murderers, 
because  Jehovah,  the  Holy  One,  dwelt  in  it,  among  the  children  of 
Israel  (cf.  Lev.  xviii.  25  sqq.). 

LAW  CONCERNING  THE  MARRIAGE  OF  HEIRESSES. — CHAP.  XXXYI. 

Yers.  1-4.  The  occasion  for  this  law  was  a  representation  made 
to  Moses  and  the  princes  of  the  congregation  by  the  heads  of  the 
fathers'  houses  (nnfcjn  for  Dinxn-n^a,  as  in  Ex.  vi.  25,  etc.)  of  the 
family  of  Gilead  the  Manassite,  to  which  Zelophehad  (chap.  xxvi. 
33)  belonged,  to  the  effect  that,  by  allotting  an  hereditary  possession 
to  the  daughters  of  Zelophehad,  the  tribe-territory  assigned  to  the 
Manassites  would  be  diminished  if  they  should  marry  into  another 
tribe.  They  founded  their  appeal  upon  the  command  of  Jehovah, 
that  the  land  was  to  be  distributed  by  lot  among  the  Israelites  for 
an  inheritance  (ver.  2  compared  with  chap.  xxvi.  55,  56,  and  xxxiii. 
54)  ;  and  although  it  is  not  expressly  stated,  yet  on  the  ground  of 
the  promise  of  the  everlasting  possession  of  Canaan  (Gen.  xvii.  8), 
and  the  provision  made  by  the  law,  that  an  inheritance  was  not 
to  be  alienated  (Lev.  xxv.  10,  13,  23  sqq.),  they  understood  it  as 
signifying  that  the  portion  assigned  to  each  tribe  was  to  continue 
unchanged  to  all  generations.  (The  singular  pronoun,  my  Lord,  in 
ver.  2,  refers  to  the  speaker,  as  in  chap,  xxxii.  27.)  Now,  as  the 
inheritance  of  their  brother,  i.e.  their  tribe-mate  Zelophehad,  had 
been  given  to  his  daughters  (chap,  xxvii.  1),  if  they  should  be 
chosen  as  wives  by  any  of  the  children  of  the  (other)  tribes  of 
Israel,  i.e.  should  marry  into  another  tribe,  their  inheritance  would 
be  taken  away  from  the  tribe-territory  of  Manasseh,  and  would  be 
added  to  that  of  the  tribe  into  which  they  were  received.  The 
suffix  DH?  (ver.  3)  refers  ad  sensum  to  H^^,  the  tribe  regarded 
according  to  its  members. — Yer.  4.  And  when  the  year  of  jubilee 
came  round  (see  Lev.  xxv.  10),  their  inheritance  would  be  entirely 
withdrawn  from  the  tribe  of  Manasseh.  Strictly  speaking,  the 
hereditary  property  would  pass  at  once,  when  the  marriage  took 


268  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

place,  to  the  tribe  into  which  an  heiress  married,  and  not  merely  at 
the  year  of  jubilee.  But  up  to  the  year  of  jubilee  it  was  always 
possible  that  the  hereditary  property  might  revert  to  the  tribe  of 
Manasseh,  either  through  the  marriage  being  childless,  or  through 
the  purchase  of  the  inheritance.  But  in  the  year  of  jubilee  all 
landed  property  that  had  been  alienated  was  to  return  to  its  original 
proprietor  or  his  heir  (Lev.  xxv.  33  sqq.).  In  this  way  the  transfer 
of  an  inheritance  from  one  tribe  to  another,  which  took  place  in 
consequence  of  a  marriage,  would  be  established  in  perpetuity. 
And  it  was  in  this  sense  that  the  elders  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh 
meant  that  a  portion  of  the  inheritance  which  had  fallen  to  them 
by  lot  would  be  taken  away  from  their  tribe  at  the  year  of  jubilee. — 
Vers.  5-9.  Moses  declared  that  what  they  had  affirmed  was  right 
(|3),  and  then,  by  command  of  Jehovah,  he  told  the  daughters  of 
Zelophehad  that  they  might  marry  whoever  pleased  them  (the  suffix 
on,  attached  to  "'il"'V2,  for  in,  as  in  Ex.  i.  21,  Gen.  xxxi.  9,  etc.),  but 
that  he  must  belong  to  the  family  of  their  father's  tribe,  that  is  to 
say,  must  be  a  Manassite.  For  (ver.  7)  the  inheritance  was  not  to 
turn  away  the-  Israelites  from  one  tribe  to  another  (not  to  be  trans- 
ferred from  one  to  another),  but  every  Israelite  was  to  keep  to  the 
inheritance  of  his  father's  tribe,  and  no  one  was  to  enter  upon  the 
possession  of  another  tribe  by  marrying  an  heiress  belonging  to  that 
tribe.  This  is  afterwards  extended,  in  vers.  8  and  9,  into  a  general 
law  for  every  heiress  in  Israel. 

In  vers.  10-12  it  is  related  that,  in  accordance  with  these 
instructions,  the  five  daughters  of  Zelophehad,  whose  names  are 
repeated  from  chap.  xxvi.  33  and  xxvii.  1  (see  also  Josh.  xvii.  3), 
married  husbands  from  the  families  of  the  Manassites,  namely,  sons 
of  their  cousins  (?  uncles),  and  thus  their  inheritance  remained  in 
their  father's  tribe  (?V  t^l^j,  to  be  and  remain  upon  anything). — Yer. 
13.  The  conclusion  refers  not  merely  to  the  laws  and  rights  con- 
tained in  chap,  xxxiii.  50-xxxvi.  13,  but  includes  the  rest  of  the 
laws  given  in  the  steppes  of  Moab  (chap,  xxv.-xxx.),  and  forms  the 
conclusion  to  the  whole  book,  which  places  the  lawgiving  in  the 
steppes  of  Moab  by  the  side  of  the  lawgiving  at  Mount  Sinai  (Lev. 
xxvi.  46,  xlvii.  34)  and  brings  it  to  a  close,  though  without  in  any 
way  implying  that  the  explanation  ("i^?,  Deut.  i.  5),  further  develop- 
ment, and  hortatory  enforcement  of  the  law  and  its  testimonies, 
statutes,  and  judgments  (Deut.  i.  5,  iv.  44  sqq.,  xii.  1  sqq.),  which 
follow  in  Deuteronomy,  are  not  of  Mosaic  origin. 


THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

(DEUTERONOMY.) 


INTRODUCTION. 


HE  fifth  book  of  Moses,  which  is  headed  Dnnn  n^X,  or 
briefly  Dnm,  in  the  Hebrew  Bibles,  from  the  opening 
words  of  the  book,  is  called  nninn  n:E^  {repetitio  legis), 
or  merely  Hi^  by  the  Hellenistic  Jews  and  some  of 
the  Rabbins,  with  special  reference  to  its  contents  as  described  in 
chap.  xvii.  18.  The  rabbinical  explanation  of  the  latter  given  in 
Milnster  and  Fagius  is  D"'J1C'K11  P"i2T5  "  memoria  rerum  pnorum, 
qucB  in  aliis  scribuntur  libris"  Bj"  some  of  the  Rabbins  the  book 
is  also  called  HinDin  "iBD,  Uber  redargutionum.  The  first,  of  these 
titles  has  become  cm'rent  in  the  Christian  Church  through  the 
rendering  given  by  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate,  Aevrepovofiiov,  Deutero- 
nomium ;  and  although  it  has  arisen  from  an  incorrect  rendering  of 
chap.  xvii.  18  (see  the  exposition  of  the  passage),  it  is  so  far  a  suit- 
able one,  that  it  describes  quite  correctly  the  leading  contents  of 
the  book  itself.  The  book  of  Deuteronomy  contains  not  so  much 
"  a  recapitulation  of  the  things  commanded  and  done,  as  related  in 
Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Numbers"  (Tlieod.),  as  "a  compendium 
and  summary  of  the  whole  law  and  wisdom  of  the  people  of  Israel, 
wherein  those  things  which  related  to  the  priests  and  Levites  are 
omitted,  and  only  such  things  included  as  the  people  generally 
required  to  know"  (Luther).  Consequently  it  is  not  merely  a 
repetition  and  summary  of  the  most  important  laws  and  events 
contained  in  the  previous  books,  still  less  a  mere  "  summons  to  the 
law  and  testimony,"  or  a  "  fresh  and  independent  lawgiving  stand- 
ing side  by  side  with  the  earlier  one,"  a  "  transformation  of  the 


270  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES.    ^^^^^^^^^^ 

old  law  to  suit  the  altered  circumstances/'  or  "merely  a  second! 
book  of  the  law,  intended  for  the  people  that  knew  not  the  law  " 
{Ewaldy  Riehnij  etc.) ;  but  a  liortatory  descriptiony  explanation,  and 
enforcement  of  the  most  essential  contents  of  the  covenant  revelation 
and  covenant  laws,  with  eni^jhatic  prominence  given  to  the  spiritual 
principle  of  the  law  and  its  fulfilment,  and  with  a  further  develop- 
ment of  the  ecclesiastical,  judicial,  political,  and  civil  organization, 
which  was  intended'  as  a  permanent  foundation  for  the  life  and  well- 
heing  of  the  people  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  There  is  not  the  slightest 
trace,  throughout  the  whole  book,  of  any  irftention  whatever  to 
give  a  new  or  second  law.  Whilst  the  laws  as  well  as  the  divine 
promises  and  threatenings  in  the  three  middle  books  of  the  Penta- 
teuch are  all  introduced  as  words  of  Jehovah  to  Moses,  which  he 
was  to  make  known  to  the  people,  and  even  where  the  announce- 
ment passes  over  into  the  form  of  an  address, — as,  for  example,  in 
Ex.  xxiii.  20  sqq..  Lev.  xxvi., — are  not  spoken  by  Moses  in  his  own 
name,  but  spoken  by  Jehovah  to  Israel  through  Moses ;  the  book 
of  Deuteronomy,  with  the  exception  of  chap,  xxxi.-xxxiv.,  contains 
nothing  but  words  addressed  by  Moses  to  the  people,  with  the 
intention,  as  he  expressly  affirms  in  chap.  i.  5,  of  explaining  0^'^) 
the  law  to  the  people.  Accordingly  he  does  not  quote  those  laws, 
which  were  given  before  and  are  merely  repeated  here,  nor  the 
further  precepts  and  arrangements  that  were  added  to  them,  such 
as  those  concerning  the  one  site  for  the  worship  of  God,  the  pro- 
phetic and  regal  qualifications,  the  administration  of  justice  and 
carrying  on  of  war,  in  the  categorical  language  of  law ;  but  clothes 
them,  as  well  as  the  other  commandments,  in  the  hortatory  form  of 
a  paternal  address,  full  of  solemn  and  affectionate  admonition,  with 
the  addition  of  such  reminiscences  and  motives  as  seemed  best 
adapted  to  impress  their  observance  upon  the  hearts  of  the  people. 
As  the  repetition  not  only  of  the  decalogue,  which  God  addressed 
to  the  people  directly  from  Sinai,  but  also  of  many  other  laws, 
which  He  gave  through  Moses  at  Sinai  and  during  the  journey 
through  the  desert,  had  no  other  object  than  this,  to  make  the 
contents  of  the  covenant  legislation  intelligible  to  all  the  people, 
and  to  impress  them  upon  their  hearts ;  so  those  laws  which  are 
peculiar  to  our  book  are  not  additions  made  to  this  legislation  for 
the  purpose  of  completing  it,  but  simply  furnish  such  explanations 
and  illustrations  of  its  meaning  as  were  rendered  necessary  by  the 
peculiar  relations  and  forms  of  the  religious,  social,  and  political 
life  of  the  nation  in  the  promised  land  of  Canaan.     Throughout 


INTRODUCTION.  271 

the  whole  book,  the  law,  with  its  commandments,  statutes,  and 
judgments,  which  Moses  laid  "this  day"  before  the  people,  is 
never  described  as  either  new  or  altered ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  only 
the  law  of  the  covenant,  which  Jehovah  had  concluded  with  His 
people  at  Horeb  (chap.  v.  1  sqq.) ;  and  the  commandments,  statutes, 
and  judgments  of  this  law  Moses  had  received  from  the  Lord  upon 
the  Mount  (Sinai),  that  he  might  teach  Israel  to  keep  them  (chap. 
V.  31  sqq. ;  comp.  chap.  vi.  20-25).  The  details  of  the  book  also 
bear  this  out. 

The  first  part  of  the  book,  which  embraces  by  far  the  greater 
portion  of  it,  viz.  chap,  i.— xxx.,  consists  of  three  long  addresses, 
which  Moses  delivered  to  all  Israel,  according  to  the  heading  of 
chap.  i.  1-4,  in  the  land  of  Moab,  on  the  first  of  the  eleventh 
month,  in  the  fortieth  year  after  the  exodus  from  Egypt.  The  first 
of  these  addresses  (chap.  i.  6-iv.  40)  is  intended  to  prepare  the 
way  for  the  exposition  and  enforcement  of  the  law,  which  follow 
afterwards.  Moses  calls  to  their  recollection  the  most  important 
facts  connected  with  the  history  of  their  forty  years'  wandering  in 
the  desert,  under  the  protection  and  merciful  guidance  of  the  Lord 
(chap.  i.  6-iii.  29)  ;  and  to  this  he  attaches  the  exhortation  not  to 
forget  the  revelation  of  the  Lord,  which  they  had  seen  at  Horeb, 
or  the  words  of  the  covenant  which  they  had  heard,  but  to  bear  in 
mind  at  all  times,  that  Jehovah  alone  was  God  in  heaven  and  on 
earth,  and  to  keep  His  commandments  and  rights,  that  they  might 
enjoy  long  life  and  prosperity  in  the  land  of  Canaan  (chap.  iv.  1-40). 
This  is  followed  by  the  statement  in  chap.  iv.  41—43,  that  Moses 
set  apart  three  cities  of  refuge  in  the  land  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan 
for  unintentional  manslayers.  The  second  address  (chap,  v.-xxvi.) 
is  described  in  the  heading  in  chap.  iv.  44-49  as  the  law,  which 
Moses  set  before  the  children  of  Israel,  and  consists  of  two  parts, 
the  one  general  and  the  other  particular.  In  the  general  part  (chap, 
v.— xi.),  Moses  repeats  the  ten  words  of  the  covenant,  which  Jehovah 
spoke  to  Israel  from  Sinai  out  of  the  midst  of  the  fire,  together  with 
the  circumstances  which  attended  their  promulgation  (chap,  v.),  and 
then  expounds  the  contents  of  the  first  tw^o  commandments  of  the 
decalogue,  that  Jehovah  alone  is  the  true  and  absolute  God,  and 
requires  love  from  His  people  with  all  their  heart  and  all  their  soul, 
and  therefore  will  not  tolerate  the  worship  of  any  other  god  beside 
Himself  (chap.  vi.).  For  this  reason  the  Israelites  were  not  only 
to  form  no  alliance  with  the  Canaanites  after  conquering  them,  and 
taking  possession  of  the  promised  land,  but  to  exterminate  them 


272  l^HE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

without  quarter,  and  destroy  their  altars  and  idols,  because  the  Lord 
had  chosen  them  to  be  His  holy  nation  from  love  to  their  forefathers, 
and  would  keep  the  covenant  of  His  grace,  and  bestow  the  richest 
blessings  upon  them,  if  they  observed  His  commandments  (chap, 
vii.)  ;  but  when  in  possession  and  enjoyment  of  the  riches  of  this 
blessed  land,  they  were  to  remain  for  ever  mindful  of  the  tempta- 
tion, humiliation,  and  fatherly  chastisement  which  they  had  expe- 
rienced at  the  hand  of  their  God  in  the  wilderness,  that  they  might 
not  forget  the  Lord  and  His  manifestations  of  mercy  in  their  self- 
exaltation  (chap,  viii.),  but  might  constantly  remember  that  they 
owed  their  conquest  and  possession  of  Canaan  not  to  their  own 
righteousness,  but  solely  to  the  compassion  and  covenant  faithful- 
ness of  the  Lord,  whom  they  had  repeatedly  provoked  to  anger  in 
the  wilderness  (chap.  ix.  1— x.  11),  and  might  earnestly  strive  to 
serve  the  Lord  in  true  fear  and  love,  and  to  keep  His  command- 
ments, that  they  might  inherit  the  promised  blessing,  and  not  be 
exposed  to  the  curse  which  would  fall  upon  transgressors  and  the 
worshippers  of  idols  (chap.  x.  12-xi.  32).  To  this  there  is  added 
in  the  more  special  part  (chap,  xii.-xxvi.),  an  account  of  the  most 
important  laws  which  all  Israel  was  to  observe  in  the  land  of  its 
inheritance,  viz. :  (1.)  Directions  for  the  behaviour  of  Israel  towards 
the  Lord  God,  e.g.  as  to  the  presentation  of  sacrificial  offerings  and 
celebration  of  sacrificial  meals  at  no  other  place  than  the  one  chosen 
by  God  for  the  revelation  of  His  name  (chap,  xii.)  ;  as  to  the  de- 
struction of  all  seducers  to  idolatry,  whether  prophets  who  rose  up 
with  signs  and  wonders,  or  the  closest  blood-relations,  and  such  towns 
in  the  land  as  should  fall  away  to  idolatry  (chap,  xiii.) ;  as  to  absti- 
nence from  the  mourning  ceremonies  of  the  heathen,  and  from 
unclean  food,  and  the  setting  apart  of  tithes  for  sacrificial  meals 
and  for  the  poor  (chap,  xiv.)  ;  as  to  the  observance  of  the  year  of 
remission,  the  emancipation  of  Hebrew  slaves  in  the  seventh  year, 
and  the  dedication  of  the  first-born  of  oxen  and  sheep  (chap,  xv.), 
and  as  to  the  celebration  of  the  feast  of  Passover,  of  Weeks,  and  of 
Tabernacles,  by  sacrificial  meals  at  the  sanctuary  (chap.  xvi.  1-17). 
(2.)  Laws  concerning  the  organization  of  the  theocratic  state,  and 
especially  as  to  the  appointment  of  judges  and  official  persons  in 
every  town,  and  the  trial  of  idolaters  and  evil-doers  in  both  the 
lower  and  higher  forms  (chap.  xvi.  18-xvii.  13)  ;  concerning  the 
choice  of  a  king  in  the  future,  and  his  duties  (chap.  xvii.  14-20)  ; 
concerning  the  rights  of  priests  and  Levites  (chap,  xviii.  1-8)  ;  and 
concerning  false  and  true  prophets  (vers.  9-22).     (3.)  Regulations 


INTRODUCTION.  273 

bearing  upon  tlie  sanctification  of  human  life :  viz.  legal  instructions 
as  to  the  establishment  of  cities  of  refuge  for  unintentional  man- 
slayers  (chap.  xix.  1-13)  ;  as  to  the  maintenance  of  the  sanctity 
of  the  boundaries  of  landed  property,  and  abstinence  from  false 
charges  against  a  neighbour  (vers.  14-21)  ;  as  to  the  conduct  of 
war,  with  special  reference  to  the  duty  of  sparing  their  own  fighting 
men,  and  also  defenceless  enemies  and  their  towns  (chap,  xx.)  ;  as 
to  the  expiation  of  inexplicable  murders  (chap.  xxi.  1-9)  ;  as  to  the 
mild  treatment  of  women  taken  in  war  (vers.  10-14)  ;  the  just  use 
of  paternal  authority  (vers.  15-21)  ;  and  the  burial  of  criminals 
that  had  been  executed  (vers.  22,  23).  (4.)  The  duty  of  paying 
affectionate  regard  to  the  property  of  a  neighbour,  and  cherishing 
a  sacred  dread  of  violating  the  moral  and  natural  order  of  the  world 
(chap.  xxii.  1-12),  with  various  precepts  for  the  sanctification  of 
the  marriage  bond  (chap.  xxii.  13-xxiii.  1),  of  the  theocratic  union 
as  a  congregation  (chap,  xxiii.  2-26),  and  also  of  domestic  and 
social  life,  in  all  its  manifold  relations  (chaps,  xxiv.  and  xxv.)  ;  and 
lastly,  the  appointment  of  prayers  of  thanksgiving  on  the  presenta- 
tion of  the  first-fruits  and  tenths  of  the  fruits  of  the  field  (chap, 
xxvi.  1-15)  ;  together  with  a  closing  admonition  (vers.  16-19)  to 
observe  all  these  laws  and  rights  with  all  the  heart.  The  third 
address  (chap,  xxvii.-xxx.)  has  reference  to  the  renewal  of  the  cove- 
nant. This  solemn  act  is  introduced  with  a  command  to  write  the 
law  upon  large  stones  when  Canaan  should  be  conquered,  and  to 
set  up  these  stones  upon  Mount  Ebal,  to  build  an  altar  there  ;  and 
after  presenting  burnt-offerings  and  slain-offerings,  to  proclaim  in 
the  most  solemn  manner  both  the  blessing  and  curse  of  the  law, 
the  former  upon  Gerizim,  and  the  latter  upon  Ebal  (chap,  xxvii.). 
Moses  takes  occasion  from  this  command  to  declare  most  fully  what 
blessings  and  curses  would  come  upon  the  people,  according  as  they 
should  or  should  not  hearken  to  the  voice  of  the  Lord  (chap,  xxviii.). 
Then  follows  the  renewal  of  the  covenant,  which  consisted  in  the 
fact  that  Moses  recited  once  more,  in  a  solemn  address  to  the  whole 
of  the  national  assembly,  all  that  the  Lord  had  done  for  them  and 
to  them  ;  and  after  pointing  again  to  the  ^blessings  and  curses  of  the 
law,  called  upon  them  and  adjured  them  to  enter  into  the  covenant 
of  Jehovah  their  God,  which  He  had  that  day  concluded  with 
them,  and  having  before  them  blessing  and  cursing,  life  and  death, 
to  make  the  choice  of  life. — The  second  and  much  shorter  portion 
of  the  book  (chap,  xxxi.-xxxiv.)  contains  the  close  of  Moses'  life  and 
labours  :  (a)  the  appointment  of  Joshua  to  be  the  leader  of  Israel 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  8 


274  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

into  Canaan,  and  the  handing  over  of  the  book  of  the  law,  when 
completed,  to  the  priests,  for  them  to  keep  and  read  to  the  people 
at  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  in  the  year  of  jubilee  (chap,  xxxi.)  ; 
(b)  the  song  of  Moses  (chap,  xxxii.  1-47),  and  the  announcement 
of  his  death  (vers.  48-52)  ;  (c)  the  blessing  of  Moses  (chap,  xxxiii.)  ; 
and  (d)  the  account  of  his  death  (chap,  xxxiv.). 

From  this  general  survey  of  the  contents,  it  is  sufficiently  evident 
that  the  exposition  of  the  commandments,  statutes,  and  rights  of 
the  law  had  no  other  object  than  this,  to  pledge  the  nation  in  the 
most  solemn  manner  to  an  inviolable  observance,  in  the  land  of 
Canaan,  of  the  covenant  which  Jehovah  had  made  with  Israel  at 
Horeb  (chap,  xxviii.  69).  To  this  end  Moses  not  only  repeats  the 
fundamental  law  of  this  covenant,  the  decalogue,  but  many  of  the 
separate  commandments,  statutes,  and  rights  of  the  more  expanded 
Sinaitic  law.  These  are  rarely  given  in  extenso  {e.g.  the  laws  of  food 
m  chap,  xiv.),  but  for  the  most  part  simply  in  brief  hints,  bringing 
out  by  way  of  example  a  few  of  the  more  important  rules,  for  the 
purpose  of  linking  on  some  further  explanations  of  the  law  in  its  ap- 
plication to  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  land  of  Canaan.  And 
throughout,  as  F.  W.  Schultz  correctly  observes,  the  intention  of  the 
book  is,  "  by  means  of  certain  supplementary  and  auxiliary  rules, 
to  ensure  the  realization  of  the  laws  or  institutions  of  the  earlier 
books,  the  full  validity  of  which  it  presupposes ;  and  that  not  merely 
in  some  fashion  or  other,  but  in  its  true  essence,  and  according  to 
its  higher  object  and  idea,  notwithstanding  all  the  difficulties  that 
might  present  themselves  in  Canaan  or  elsewhere."  Not  only  arc 
the  instructions  relating  to  the  building  of  the  sanctuary,  the  service 
of  the  priests  and  Levites,  and  the  laws  of  sacrifice  and  purification, 
passed  over  without  mention  as  being  already  known ;  but  of  the 
festivals  and  festive  celebrations,  only  the  three  annual  feasts  of 
Passover,  Pentecost,  and  Tabernacles  are  referred  to,  and  that  but 
briefly,  for  the  purpose  of  commanding  the  observance  of  the  sacri- 
ficial meals  which  were  to  be  held  at  the  sanctuary  in  connection 
with  these  feasts  (chap.  xvi.).  The  tithes  and  first-fruits  are  noticed 
several  times,  but  only  so  :far  as  they  were  to  be  applied  to  common 
sacrificial  meals  before  the  Lord.  The  appointment  of  judges  is 
commanded  in  all  the  towns  of  the  land,  and  rules  are  given  by 
which  the  judicial  form  of  procedure  is  determined  more  minutely ; 
but  no  rule  is  laid  down  as  to  the  election  of  the  judges,  simply 
because  this  had  been  done  before.  On  the  other  hand,  instructions 
are  given  concerning  the  king  whom  the  people  would  one  day 


INTRODUCTION.  275 

desire  to  set  over  themselves ;  concerning  the  prophets  whom  the 
Lord  would  raise  up  ;  and  also  concerning  any  wars  that  might  be 
waged  with  other  nations  than  the  Canaanites,  the  extermination 
of  the  latter  being  enforced  once  more ;  and  several  things  besides. 
— And  if  this  selection  of  materials  indicates  an  intention,  not  so 
much  to  complete  the  legislation  of  the  earlier  books  by  the  addition 
of  new  laws,  as  to  promote  its  observance  and  introduction  into 
the  national  life,  and  secure  its  permanent  force ;  this  intention 
becomes  still  more  apparent  when  we  consider  how  Moses,  after 
repeating  the  decalogue,  not  only  sums  up  the  essential  contents 
of  all  the  commandments,  statutes,  and  rights  which  Jehovah  has 
commanded,  in  the  one  command  to  love  God  with  all  the  heart, 
etc.,  and  sets  forth  this  commandment  as  the  sum  of  the  whole  law, 
but  in  all  his  expositions  of  the  law,  all  his  exhortations  to  obedi- 
ence, and  all  threats  and  promises,  aims  ever  at  this  one  object,  to 
awaken  in  the  hearts  of  the  people  a  proper  state  of  mind  for  the 
observance  of  the  commandments  of  God,  viz.  a  feeling  of  humility 
and  love  and  willing  obedience,  and  to  destroy  that  love  for  merely 
outward  legality  and  pharisaic  self-righteousness  which  is  inherent 
in  the  natural  man,  that  the  people  may  circumcise  the  foreskin  of 
their  heart,  and  enter  heartily  into  the  covenant  of  their  God,  and 
maintain  that  covenant  with  true  fidelity. 

It  is  in  this  peculiar  characteristic  and  design  of  the  legislative 
addresses  which  the  book  contains,  and  not  in  the  purpose  attributed 
to  it,  of  appending  a  general  law  for  the  nation  to  the  legislation  of 
the  previous  books,  which  had  reference  chiefly  to  the  priests  and 
Levites,^  that  we  are  to  seek  for  that  completion  of  the  law  which 
the  book  of  Deuteronomy  supplies.  And  in  this  we  may  find  the 
strongest  proof  of  the  Mosaic  origin  of  this  concluding  part  of  the 
Thorah.     What  the  heading  distinctly  states  (chap.  i.  1-4), — viz. 

^  In  opposition  to  this  view  of  Ed.  Eiehm,  ScTiuUz  justly  argues  that  the 
book  of  Deuteronomy  is  very  far  from  containing  everything  that  concerned  the 
people  and  was  of  great  importance  to  them.  It  does  not  even  repeat  those  laws 
of  the  first  book  of  the  covenant  in  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.,  which  affected  most  closely 
the  social  every-day  life  of  the  people.  It  contains  nothing  about  circumcision, 
which  certainly  could  not  have  been  omitted  from  the  national  law-book;  no 
further  details  as  to  the  Passover,  Pentecost,  and  the  feast  of  Tabernacles ;  it 
does  not  even  mention  the  great  day  of  atonement,  on  which,  every  Israelite  had 
to  fast  on  pain  of  death,  nor  the  feast  of  trumpets  and  year  of  jubilee ;  and  the 
Sabbath  command  is  simply  introduced  quite  briefly  in  and  with  the  decalogue. 
Of  all  the  defilements  and  washings,  which  were  of  the  greatest  moment,  accord- 
ing to  the  Old  Testament  view,  to  every  individual,  there  is  not  a  single  word- 


276  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

that  Moses  delivered  this  address  to  all  Israel  a  short  time  before 
his  death  in  the  land  of  Moab,  on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan,  and 
therefore  on  the  threshold  of  the  promised  land, — is  confirmed 
by  both  the  form  and  contents  of  the  book.  As  Hengstenherg  has 
well  observed  {Ev.  K,  Z.  1862,  No.  5,  pp.49  sqq.),  "the  address  of 
Moses  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  his  situation.  He  speaks  like  a 
dying  father  to  his  children.  The  words  are  earnest,  inspired,  im- 
pressive. He  looks  back  over  the  whole  of  the  forty  years  of  their 
wandering  in  the  desert,  reminds  the  people  of  all  the  blessings 
they  have  received,  of  the  ingratitude  with  which  they  have  so 
often  repaid  them,  and  of  the  judgments  of  God,  and  the  love  that 
continually  broke  forth  behind  them ;  he  explains  the  laws  again 
and  again,  and  adds  what  is  necessary  to  complete  them,  and  is 
never  weary  of  urging  obedience  to  them  in  the  warmest  and  most 
emphatic  words,  because  the  very  life  of  the  nation  was  bound  up 
with  this ;  he  surveys  all  the  storms  and  conflicts  which  they  have 
passed  through,  and,  beholding  the  future  in  the  past,  takes  a  survey 
also  of  the  future  history  of  the  nation,  and  sees,  with  mingled 
sorrow  and  joy,  how  the  three  great  features  of  the  past — viz.  apos- 
tasy, punishment,  and  pardon — continue  to  repeat  themselves  in  the 
future  also. — ^The  situation  throughout  is  the  time  when  Israel  was 
standing  on  the  border  of  the  promised  land,  and  preparing  to  cross 
the  Jordan ;  and  there  is  never  any  allusion  to  what  formed  the 
centre  of  the  national  life  in  future  times — to  Jerusalem  and  its 
temple,  or  to  the  Davidic  monarchy.  The  approaching  conquest  of 
the  land  is  merely  taken  for  granted  as  a  whole  ;  the  land  is  dressed 
throughout  in  all  the  charms  of  a  desired  good,  and  no  reference  is 
ever  made  to  the  special  circumstances  of  Israel  in  the  land  about 
to  be  conquered."  To  this  there  is  to  be  added  what  makes  its 
appearance  on  every  hand — the  most  lively  remembrance  of  Egypt, 
and  the  condition  of  the  people  when  living  there  (cf.  chap.  v.  15, 
vii.  15,  xi.  10,  XV.  15,  xvi.  12,  xxiv.  18,  xxviii.  27,  35,  60),  and  an 
accurate  acquaintance  with  the  very  earliest  circumstances  of  the 
different  nations  with  which  the  Israelites  came  into  either  friendly 
or  hostile  contact  in  the  Mosaic  age  (chap,  ii.) ;  together  with  many 
other  things  that  were  entirely  changed  a  short  time  after  the  con- 
quest of  Canaan  by  the  Israelites. 

And  just  as  these  addresses,  which  complete  the  giving  of  the 
law  and  bring  it  to  a  close,  form  an  integral  part  of  the  TKorafi^  so 
the  historical  account  of  the  finishing  of  the  book  of  the  law,  and  its 
being  handed  over  to  the  priests,  together  with  the  song  and  blessing 


CHAP.  I.  1-5.  277 

of  Moses  (chap,  xxxi.-xxxiil.),  form  a  fitting  conclusion  to  the  work 
of  Moses,  the  lawgiver  and  mediator  of  the  old  covenant ;  and  to 
this  the  account  of  his  death,  with  which  the  Pentateuch  closes 
(chap,  xxxiv.),  is  very  appropriately  appended. 


EXPOSITION. 

HEADING   AND   INTRODUCTION. 

Chap.  i.  1-5. 

Vers.  1-4  contain  the  heading  to  the  whole  book ;  and  to  this  the 
introduction  to  the  first  address  is  appended  in  ver.  5.  By  the  ex- 
pression, "  These  he  the  words^''  etc.,  Deuteronomy  is  attached  to  the 
previous  books ;  the  word  "  these"  which  refers  to  the  addresses 
that  follow,  connects  what  follows  with  what  goes  before,  just  as  in 
Gen.  ii.  4,  vi.  9,  etc.  The  geographical  data  in  ver.  1  present  no 
little  difficulty ;  for  whilst  the  general  statement  as  to  the  place 
where  Moses  delivered  the  addresses  in  this  book,  viz.  heyond 
Jordan,  is  particularized  in  the  introduction  to  the  second  address 
(chap.  iv.  46),  as  '* in  the  valley  over  against  Beth-Peor,^  here  it  is 
described  as  "  in  the  wilderness,  in  the  Arahah^'  etc.  This  contrast 
between  the  verse  before  us  and  chap.  iv.  45,  46,  and  still  more 
the  introduction  of  the  very  general  and  loose  expression,  "  in  the 
desert"  which  is  so  little  adapted  for  a  geographical  definition  of 
the  locality,  that  it  has  to  be  defined  itself  by  the  additional  words 
"m  the  Arahah"  suggest  the  conclusion  that  the  particular  names 
introduced  are  not  intended  to  furnish  as  exact  a  geographical  ac- 
count as  possible  of  the  spot  where  Moses  explained  the  law  to  all 
Israel,  but  to  call  up  to  view  the  scene  of  the  addresses  which  follow, 
and  point  out  the  situation  of  all  Israel  at  that  time.  Israel  was 
" in  the  desert"  not  yet  in  Canaan  the  promised  inheritance,  and 
in  fact  "  in  the  Arahah."  This  is  the  name  given  to  the  deep  low- 
lying  plain  on  both  sides  of  the  Jordan,  which  runs  from  the  Lake 
of  Gennesaret  to  the  Dead  Sea,  and  stretches  southwards  from  the 
Dead  Sea  to  Aila,  at  the  northern  extremity  of  the  Red  Sea,  as  we 
may  see  very  clearly  from  chap.  ii.  8,  where  the  way  which  the 
Israehtes  took  past  Edom  to  Aila  is  called  the  "  way  of  the  Arahah" 
and  also  from  the  fact  that  the  Dead  Sea  is  called  "  tlie  sea  of  the 


278  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


Arahali^  in  chap.  iii.  17  and  iv.  49.  At  present  the  name  Arahah 
is  simply  attached  to  the  southern  half  of  this  valley,  between  the 
Dead  Sea  and  the  Eed  Sea ;  whilst  the  northern  part,  between 
the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  is  called  el  Ghor ;  though 
Ahulfeda,  Ibn  Ilaukal,  and  other  Arabic  geographers,  extend  the 
name  Ghor  from  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret  to  Aila  (cf.  Ges.  thes. 
p.  1166  ;  Ilengstenherg,  Balaam,  p.  520  ;  Rohinson,  Pal.  ii.  p.  596). — 
?1^D  i^iD,  "  over  against  SupW^  (^iD  for  te,  chap.  ii.  19,  iii.  29,  etc., 
for  the  sake  of  euphony,  to  avoid  the  close  connection  of  the  two 
w-sounds).  Suph  is  probably  a  contraction  of  ^1D"D;;,  "the  Red 
Sea"  (see  at  Ex.  x.  19).  This  name  is  given  not  only  to  the  Gulf 
of  Suez  (Ex.  xiii.  18,  xv.  4,  22,  etc.),  but  to  that  of  Akabah  also 
(Num.  xiv.  25,  xxi.  4,  etc.).  There  is  no  other  Suph  that  would  be 
at  all  suitable  here.  The  LXX.  have  rendered  it  TrXijaLov  t^9 
ipv6pd^  Oakda-crr)^; ;  and  Onkelos  and  others  adopt  the  same  ren- 
dering. This  description  cannot  serve  as  a  more  precise  definition 
of  the  Arahah,  in  which  case  "i??'^  (which)  would  have  to  be  supplied 
before  b)D,  since  "  the  Arabah  actually  touches  the  Red  Sea."  Nor 
does  it  point  out  the  particular  spot  in  the  Arabah  w^here  the  ad- 
dresses were  delivered,  as  Knohel  supposes  ;  or  indicate  the  connec- 
tion between  the  Arbotli  Moab  and  the  continuation  of  the  Arabah 
on  the  other  side  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  point  out  the  Arabah  in  all 
this  extent  as  the  heart  of  the  country  over  which  the  Israelites  had 
moved  during  the  whole  of  their  forty  years'  wandering  {Hengsten- 
herg).  For  although  the  Israelites  passed  twice  through  the  Arabah 
(see  p.  246),  it  formed  by  no  means  the  heart  of  the  country  in 
which  they  continued  for  forty  years.  The  words  "opposite  to  Suph,^ 
when  taken  in  connection  with  the  following  names,  cannot  have 
any  other  object  than  to  define  with  greater  exactness  the  desert 
in  which  the  Israelites  had  moved  during  the  forty  years.  Moses 
spoke  to  all  Israel  on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan,  when  it  was 
still  in  the  desert,  in  the  Arabah,  still  opposite  to  the  Red  Sea,  after 
crossing  which  it  had  entered  the  wilderness  (Ex.  xv.  22),  "  between 
Paran,  and  Tophel,  and  Laban,  and  Hazeroth,  and  Di-Sahabr 
Paran  is  at  all  events  not  the  desert  of  this  name  in  all  its  extent 
(see  vol.  ii.  pp.  58,  59),  but  the  place  of  encampment  in  the  "  desert 
of  Paran'^  (Num.  x.  12,  xii.  16),  i.e.  the  district  of  Kadesh  in  the 
desert  of  Zin  (isTum.  xiii.  21,  26)  ;  and  Hazeroth  is  most  probably 
the  place  of  encampment  of  that  name  mentioned  in  Num.  xi.  35,  xii. 
16,  from  which  Israel  entered  the  desert  of  Paran.  Both  places  had 
been  very  eventful  to  the  Israelites.    At  Hazeroth,  Miriam  the  pro- 


\ 


CHAP.  I.  1-5.  279 

phetess  and  Aaron  the  high  priest  had  stumbled  through  rebellion 
against  Moses  (Num.  xii.).  In  the  desert  of  Paran  by  Kadesh  the 
older  generation  had  been  rejected,  and  sentenced  to  die  in  the  wil- 
derness on  account  of  its  repeated  rebellion  against  the  Lord  (Num. 
xiv.)  ;  and  when  the  younger  generation  that  had  grown  up  in  the 
wilderness  assembled  once  more  in  Kadesh  to  set  out  for  Canaan, 
even  Moses  and  Aaron,  the  two  heads  of  the  nation,  sinned  there 
at  the  water  of  strife,  so  that  they  two  were  not  permitted  to  enter 
Canaan,  whilst  Miriam  died  there  at  that  time  (Num.  xx.).  But  if 
Paran  and  Hazeroth  are  mentioned  on  account  of  the  tragical  events 
connected  with  these  places,  it  is  natural  to  conclude  that  there  were 
similar  reasons  for  mentioning  the  other  three  names  as  well.  Tophel 
is  supposed  by  Hengstenherg  {Balaam^  p.  517)  and  Rohinson  (Pal. 
ii.  p.  570)  and  all  the  more  modern  writers,  to  be  the  large  village 
of  Tafyleli,  with  six  hundred  inhabitants,  the  chief  place  in  Jehal, 
on  the  western  side  of  the  Edomitish  mountains,  in  a  well-watered 
valley  of  the  wady  of  the  same  name,  with  large  plantations  of  fruit- 
trees  (Burckhardt,  Sp\  pp.  677,  678).  The  Israelites  may  have 
come  upon  this  place  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Ohoth  (Num.  xxi.  10, 
11)  ;  and  as  its  inhabitants,  according  to  Burckhardt,  p.  680,  supply 
the  Syrian  caravans  with  a  considerable  quantity  of  provisions, 
which  they  sell  to  them  in  the  castle  of  el  Ahsa,  Schultz  conjectures 
that  it  may  have  been  here  that  the  people  of  Israel  purchased 
food  and  drink  of  the  Edomites  for  money  (chap.  ii.  29),  and  that 
Tafyleli  is  mentioned  as  a  place  of  refreshment,  where  the  Israelites 
partook  for  the  first  time  of  different  food  from  the  desert  supply. 
There  is  a  great  deal  to  be  said  in  favour  of  this  conjecture :  for 
even  if  the  Israelites  did  not  obtain  different  food  for  the  first  time 
at  this  place,  the  situation  of  Tophel  does  warrant  the  supposition 
that  it  was  here  that  they  passed  for  the  first  time  from  the  wilder- 
ness to  an  inhabited  land;  on  which  account  the  place  was  so 
memorable  for  them,  that  it  might  very  well  be  mentioned  as  being 
the  extreme  east  of  their  wanderings  in  the  desert,  as  the  opposite 
point  to  the  encampment  at  Paran,  where  they  first  arrived  on  the 
western  side  of  their  wandering,  at  the  southern  border  of  Canaan. 
Lahan  is  generally  identified  with  Lihnali,  the  second  place  of  en- 
campment on  the  return  journey  from  Kadesh  (Num.  xxxiii.  22), 
and  may  perhaps  have  been  the  place  referred  to  in  Num.  xvi.,  but 
not  more  precisely  defined,  where  the  rebellion  of  the  company  of 
Ivorah  occurred.  Lastly,  Di-Sahah  has  been  identified  by  modern 
commentators  with  Mersa  Dahah  or  Mina  JDahabj  i.e.  gold-harbour, 


280  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

a  place  upon  a  tongue  of  land  in  the  Elanitic  Gulf,  about  the  same 
latitude  as  Sinai,  where  there  is  nothing  to  be  seen  now  except  a 
quantity  of  date-trees,  a  few  sand-hills,  and  about  a  dozen  heaps  of 
stones  piled  up  irregularly,  but  all  showing  signs  of  having  once 
been  joined  together  (cf.  Burckhardt,  pp.  847-8  ;  and  Hitter,  Erdk, 
xiv.  pp.  226  sqq.).  But  this  is  hardly  correct.  As  Roediger  has 
observed  (on  Wellsted's  Reisen,  ii.  p.  127),  "the  conjecture  has 
been  based  exclusively  upon  the  similarity  of  name,  and  there  is 
not  the  slightest  exegetical  tradition  to  favour  it."  But  similarity 
of  names  cannot  prove  anything  by  itself,  as  the  number  of  places 
of  the  same  name,  but  in  different  localities,  that  we  meet  with  in 
the  Bible,  is  very  considerable.  Moreover,  the  further  assumption 
which  is  founded  upon  this  conjecture,  namely,  that  the  Israelites 
went  from  Sinai  past  Dahab,  not  only  appears  untenable  for  the 
reasons  given  above  (p.  230),  but  is  actually  rendered  impossible  by 
the  locality  itself.  The  approach  to  this  tongue  of  land,  which 
projects  between  two  steep  lines  of  coast,  with  lofty  mountam 
ranges  of  from  800  to  2000  feet  in  height  on  both  north  and  south, 
leads  from  Sinai  through  far  too  narrow  and  impracticable  a  valley 
for  the  Israelites  to  be  able  to  march  thither  and  fix  an  encampment 
there.^  And  if  Israel  cannot  have  touched  Dahab  on  its  march, 
every  probability  vanishes  that  Moses  should  have  mentioned  this 
place  here,  and  the  name  Di-Saliab  remains  at  present  undetermin- 
able. But  in  spite  of  our  ignorance  of  this  place,  and  notwith- 
standing the  fact  that  even  the  conjecture  expressed  with  regard  to 
Laban  is  very  uncertain,  there  can  be  no  well-founded  doubt  that 
the  words  "  between  Paran  and  Topliel "  are  to  be  understood  as 
embracing  the  whole  period  of  the  thirty-seven  years  of  mourning, 
at  the  commencement  of  which  Israel  was  in  Paran,  whilst  at  the 
end  they  sought  to  enter  Canaan  by  Tophel  (the  Edomitish  Tafyleh), 
and  that  the  expression  "  opposite  to  Suph"  points  back  to  their  first 
entrance  into  the  desert. — Looking  from  the  steppes  of  Moab  over 
the  ground  that  the  Israelites  had  traversed,  Suph,  where  they  first 
entered  the  desert  of  Arabia,  would  lie  between  Paran,  where  the 
congregation  arrived  at  the  borders  of  Canaan  towards  the  west, 
and  Tophel,  where  they  first  ended  their  desert  wanderings  thirty- 
seven  years  later  on  the  east. 

^  From  the  mouth  of  the  valley  through  the  masses  of  the  primary  moun- 
tains to  the  sea-coast,  there  is  a  fan-hke  surface  of  drifts  of  primary  rock,  the 
radius  of  which  is  thirty-five  minutes  long,  the  progressive  work  of  the  inun- 
dations of  an  indefinable  course  of  thousands  of  years"  (Ruppell^  Nubien,  p.  206). 


CHAP.  I.  1-5.  281 

In  ver.  2  also  the  retrospective  glance  at  the  guidance  through 
the  desert  is  unmistakeable.  "  Eleven  days  is  the  way  from  Horeh 
to  the  mountains  of  Seir  as  far  as  Kadesh-Barnea."  With  these 
words,  which  were  unquestionably  intended  to  be  something  more 
than  a  geographical  notice  of  the  distance  of  Horeb  from  Kadesh- 
Barnea,- Moses  reminded  the  people  that  they  had  completed  the 
journey  from  Ploreb,  the  scene  of  the  establishment  of  the  covenant, 
to  Kadesh,  the  border  of  the  promised  land,  in  eleven  days  (see  pp. 
246-7),  that  he  might  lead  them  to  lay  to  heart  the  events  which 
took  place  at  Kadesh  itself.  The  "  way  of  the  mountains  of  Seir  " 
is  not  the  way  along  the  side  of  these  mountains,  i.e.  the  way 
through  the  Arabah,  which  is  bounded  by  the  mountains  of  Seir  on 
the  east,  but  the  way  which  leads  to  the  mountains  of  Seir,  just  as 
in  chap.  ii.  1  the  way  of  the  Red  Sea  is  the  way  that  leads  to  this 
sea.  From  these  words,  therefore,  it  by  no  means  follows  that 
Kadesh-Barnea  is  to  be  sought  for  in  the  Arabah,  and  that  Israel 
passed  through  the  Arabah  from  Horeb  to  Kadesh.  According  to 
ver.  19,  they  departed  from  Horeb,  went  through  the  great  and 
terrible  wilderness  by  the  way  to  the  mountains  of  the  Amorites, 
and  came  to  Kadesh-Barnea.  Hence  the  way  to  the  mountains  of 
the  Amorites,  i.e.  the  southern  part  of  what  were  afterwards  the 
mountains  of  Judah  (see  at  Num.  xiii.  17),  is  the  same  as  the  way 
to  the  mountains  of  Seir ;  consequently  the  Seir  referred  to  here 
is  not  the  range  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Arabah,  but  Seir  by 
Hormah  (ver.  44),  i.e.  the  border  plateau  by  Wady  Murreh,  opposite 
to  the  mountains  of  the  Amorites  (Josh  xi.  17,  xii.  7  :  see  at  Num. 
xxxiv.  3). 

Vers.  3,  4.  To  the  description  of  the  ground  to  which  the 
following  addresses  refer,  there  is  appended  an  alhision  to  the  not 
less  significant  time  when  Moses  delivered  them,  viz.  ''on  the  first 
of  the  eleventh  month  in  the  fortieth  year^^  consequently  towards  the 
end  of  his  life,  after  the  conclusion  of  the  divine  lawgiving ;  so  that 
he  was  able  to  speak  "  according  to  all  that  Jehovah  had  given  him 
in  commandment  unto  them^^  (the  Israelites),  namely,  in  the  legis- 
lation of  the  former  books,  which  is  always  referred  to  in  this  way 
(chap.  iv.  5,  23,  v.  29,  30,  vi.  1).  The  time  was  also  significant, 
from  the  fact  that  Sihon  and  Og,  the  kings  of  tl\e  Amorites,  had 
then  been  slain.  By  giving  a  victory  over  these  mighty  kings,  the 
Lord  had  begun  to  fulfil  His  promises  (see  chap.  ii.  25),  and  had 
thereby  laid  Israel  under  the  obligation  to  love,  gratitude,  and 
obedience  (see  Num.  xxi.  21-35).     The  suffix  in  iribn  refers  to 


282  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


n 


Moses,  who  had  smitten  the  Amorites  at  the  command  and  by  the 
power  of  Jehovah.  According  to  Josh.  xii.  4,  xiii.  12,  31,  Edrei 
was  the  second  capital  of  Og,  and  it  is  as  such  that  it  is  mentioned, 
and  not  as  the  place  where  Og  was  defeated  (chap.  iii.  1 ;  Num.  fll 
xxi.  33).  The  omission  of  the  copula  "}  before  ''V'^.l^?^  is  to  be 
accounted  for  from  the  oratorical  character  of  the  introduction  to 
the  addresses  which  follow.  Udrei  is  the  present  Draa  (see  at  fll 
Num.  xxi.  33). — In  ver.  5,  the  description  of  the  locality  is  again 
resumed  in  the  words  "  beyond  the  Jordan"  and  still  further  defined 
by  the  expression  "  in  the  land  of  Moah ; "  and  the  address  itself  is 
introduced  by  the  clause,  '^  Moses  took  in  hand  to  expound  this  law^^ 
which  explains  more  fully  the  '^3'n  (spake)  of  ver.  3.  "  In  the  land 
of  Moab  "  is  a  rhetorical  and  general  expression  for  "  in  the  Arboth 
Moab."  y^S^  does  not  mean  to  begin,  but  to  undertake,  to  take  in 
hand,  with  the  subordinate  idea  sometimes  of  venturing,  or  daring 
(Gen.  xviii.  27),  sometimes  of  a  bold  resolution :  here  it  denotes  an  fl 
undertaking  prompted  by  internal  impulse.  Instead  of  being  con- 
strued with  the  infinitive,  it  is  construed  rhetorically  here  with  the 
finite  verb  without  the  copula  (cf.  Ges.  §  143,  3,  5.).  "i&?3  probably 
signified  to  dig  in  the  Kal;  but  this  is  not  used.  In  the  Piel  it 
means  to  explain  (hLaxra(^7)aai,  explanare,  LXX.  Vulg.),  never  to 
engrave,  or  stamp,  not  even  here  nor  in  chap,  xxvii.  8  and  Hab. 
ii.  2.  Here  it  signifies  "  to  expound  this  law  clearly,"  although  the 
exposition  was  connected  with  an  earnest  admonition  to  preserve 
and  obey  it.  "This"  no  doubt  refers  to  the  law  expounded  in 
what  follows ;  but  substantially  it  is  no  other  than  the  law  already 
given  in  the  earlier  books.  "  Substantially  there  is  throughout 
but  one  law"  (Schultz).  That  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  was  not 
intended  to  furnish  a  new  or  second  law,  is  as  evident  as  possible 
from  the  word  ^i^X 


I.— THE  FIRST  PREPARATORY  ADDRESS. 
Chap.  i.  6-iv.  40. 

For  the  purpose  of  enforcing  upon  the  people  the  obligation  to 
true  fidelity  to  the  covenant,  Moses  commenced  his  address  with  a 
retrospective  glance  at  the  events  that  had  taken  place  during  the 
forty  years  of  their  journey  from  Sinai  to  the  steppes  of  Moab,  and 


CHAP.  I.  6-IV.  40.  283 

showed  in  striking  outlines  how,  when  the  Lord  had  called  upon 
the  Israelites  in  Horeh  to  arise  and  take  possession  of  the  land  of 
Canaan,  that  had  been  promised  to  the  patriarchs  for  their  de- 
scendants (chap.  i.  6-8),  they  had  greatly  increased,  and  were  well 
organized  by  chiefs  and  judges  (vers.  9-18) ;  how  they  had  pro- 
ceeded to  Kadesh-Barnea  on  the  border  of  this  land  (ver.  19),  and 
there  refused  to  enter  in,  notwithstanding  the  report  of  the  spies 
who  were  sent  out  as  to  the  goodness  of  the  land  (vers.  20-25),  but 
were  alarmed  at  the  might  and  strength  of  the  Canaanites  from 
a  want  of  confidence  in  the  assistance  of  the  Lord,  and  had  rebelled 
against  their  God,  and  been  shut  out  in  consequence  from  the  pro- 
mised land  (vers.  26-4G).  It  was  true  that  at  the  expiration  of  this 
period  of  punishment  the  Lord  had  not  permitted  them  to  make 
war  upon  Edom  and  Moab,  and  drive  out  these  nations  from  the 
possessions  which  they  had  received  from  God;  but  after  they  had 
gone  round  the  mountains  of  Edom  and  the  land  of  Moab  (chap.  ii. 
1-23),  He  had  given  Sihon  and  Og,  the  kings  of  the  Amorites, 
into  the  power  of  the  Israelites,  that  they  might  take  possession  of 
their  kingdoms  in  Gilead  and  Bashan  (chap.  ii.  54-iii.  17);  and 
after  the  conquest  of  these.  He  had  imposed  upon  the  tribes  of 
Reuben,  Gad,  and  half  Manasseh,  who  received  the  conquered  land 
for  their  inheritance,  the  obligation  to  go  with  their  brethren  across 
the  Jordan  and  help  them  to  conquer  Canaan,  and  had  also  ap- 
pointed Joshua  as  their  commander,  who  would  divide  the  land 
among  them,  since  he  (Moses)  himself  was  not  to  be  allowed  to  cross 
the  Jordan  with  them  because  of  the  anger  of  God  which  he  had 
drawn  upon  himself  on  their  account  (chap.  iii.  18-29).  He  there- 
fore appealed  to  Israel  to  hearken  to  the  commandments  of  the 
Lord,  to  preserve  and  fulfil  them  without  addition  or  diminution ; 
to  continue  mindful  of  the  covenant  which  the  Lord  had  made  with 
them ;  to  make  themselves  no  image  or  likeness  of  Jehovah,  that 
they  might  not  draw  His  wrath  upon  themselves  and  be  scattered 
among  the  heathen,  but  might  ever  remain  in  the  land,  of  which 
they  were  now  about  to  take  possession  (chap.  iv.). — In  this  address, 
therefore,  Moses  reminded  the  whole  congregation  how  the  Lord 
had  fulfilled  His  promise  from  Horeb  to  the  steppes  of  Moab,  but 
how  they  had  sinned  against  their  God  through  unbelief  and  rebel- 
lion, and  had  brought  upon  themselves  their  long  wanderings  in  the 
desert,  that  he  might  append  to  this  the  pressing  warning  not  to 
forfeit  the  permanent  possession  of  the  land  they  were  about  to 
conquer,  through  a  continued  and  fresh  transgression  of  the  cove- 


284  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


n 


riant. — Certainly  a  very  fitting  preparation  for  the  exposition  of 
the  law  which  follows. 


REVIEW  OF  THE  DIVINE  GUIDANCE  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  HOREB  TO 
KADESH. — CHAP.  I.  6-46. 

Vers.  6-18.  Moses  commenced  with  the  summons  issued  by  the 
Lord  to  Israel  at  Horeb,  to  rise  and  go  to  Canaan. — Yer.  6.  As  the 
epithet  applied  to  God,  "  Jehovah  our  God^'*  presupposes  the  recep- 
tion of  Israel  into  covenant  with  Jehovah,  which  took  place  at  Sinai, 
so  the  words,  "  ye  have  dwelt  long  enough  at  this  mountain"  imply  that 
the  purpose  for  which  Israel  was  taken  to  Horeb  had  been  answered, 
i.e.  that  they  had  been  furnished  with  the  laws  and  ordinances 
requisite  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  covenant,  and  could  now  remove 
to  Canaan  to  take  possession  of  the  promised  land.  The  word  of 
Jehovah  mentioned  here  is  not  found  in  this  form  in  the  previous 
history ;  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  it  is  contained  in  the  divine  instruc- 
tions that  were  preparatory  to  their  removal  (Num.  i.-iv.  and  ix. 
15— X.  10),  and  the  rising  of  the  cloud  from  the  tabernacle,  which 
followed  immediately  afterwards  (Num.  x.  11).  The  fixed  use  of 
the  name  Horeb  to  designate  the  mountain  group  in  general,  instead 
of  the  special  name  Sinai,  which  is  given  to  the  particular  mountain 
upon  which  the  law  was  given  (see  vol.  ii.  p.  90),  is  in  keeping  with 
the  rhetorical  style  of  the  book. — Yer.  7.  "  Go  to  the  mount  of  the 
Amorites,  and  to  all  who  dwell  near^  The  mount  of  the  Amorites 
is  the  mountainous  country  inhabited  by  this  tribe,  the  leading 
feature  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  is  synonymous  with  the  "  land 
of  the  Canaanites "  which  follows ;  the  Amorites  being  mentioned 
instar  omnium  as  being  the  most  powerful  of  all  the  tribes  in  Canaan, 
just  as  in  Gen.  xv.  16  (see  at  Gen.  x.  16).  ''"J?^",  '^  those  who  dwell 
by  itj^  are  the  inhabitants  of  the  whole  of  Canaan,  as  is  shown  by 
the  enumeration  of  the  different  parts  of  the  land,  which  follows 
immediately  afterwards.  Canaan  was  naturally  divided,  according 
to  the  character  of  the  ground,  into  the  Arabah,  the  modern  Ghor 
(see  at  ver.  1) ;  the  mountain,  the  subsequent  mountains  of  Judah 
and  Ephraim  (see  at  Num.  xiii.  17) ;  the  lowland  (shephelah),  i,e. 
the  low  flat  country  lying  between  the  mountains  of  Judah  and  the 
Mediterranean  Sea,  and  stretching  from  the  promontory  of  Carmel 
down  to  Gaza,  which  is  intersected  by  only  small  undulations  and 
ranges  of  hills,  and  generally  includes  the  hill  country  which  formed 
the  transition  from  the  mountains  to  the  plain,  though  the  two  are 


I 


CHAP.  I.  6-18.  285 

distinguished  in  Josh.  x.  40  and  idi.  8  (see  at  Josh.  xv.  33  sqq.)  ;  the 
south  land  (negeb :  see  at  Num.  xiii.  17)  ;  and  the  sea-shore^  i.e.  the 
generally  narrow  strip  of  coast  running  along  by  the  Mediterranean 
Sea  from  Joppa  to  the  Tyrian  ladder,  or  Rds  el  Ahiad,  just  below 
Tyre  (yid.  v.  Baumer,  Pal.  p.  49). — The  special  mention  of  Lebanon 
in  connection  with  the  land  of  the  Canaanites,  and  the  enumera- 
tion of  the  separate  parts  of  the  land,  as  well  as  the  extension  of 
the  eastern  frontier  as  far  as  the  Euphrates  (see  at  Gen.  xv.  18), 
are  to  be  attributed  to  the  rhetorical  fulness  of  the  style.  The 
reference,  however,  is  not  to  Antilibanus,  but  to  Lebanon  proper, 
which  was  within  the  northern  border  of  the  land  of  Israel,  as  fixed 
in  Num.  xxxiv.  7-9. — Ver.  8.  This  land  the  Lord  had  placed  at  the 
disposal  of  the  Israelites  for  them  to  take  possession  of,  as  He  had 
sworn  to  the  fathers  (patriarchs)  that  He  would  give  it  to  their 
posterity  (cf.  Gen.  xii.  7,  xiii.  15,  xv.  18  sqq.,  etc.).  The  "  swearing" 
on  the  part  of  God  points  back  to  Gen.  xxii.  16.  The  expression 
"#o  them  and  to  their  seed^^  is  the  same  as  "to  thee  and  to  thy  seed" 
in  Gen.  xiii.  15,  xvii.  8,  and  is  not  to  be  understood  as  signifying 
that  the  patriarchs  themselves  ought  to  have  taken  actual  possession 
of  Canaan;  but  "<o  their  seed ^^  is  in  apposition,  and  also  a  more 
precise  definition  (comp.  Gen.  xv.  7  with  ver.  18,  where  the  simple 
statement  "  to  thee "  is  explained  by  the  fuller  statement  "  to  thy 
seed"),  nx"}  has  grown  into  an  interjection  =  nan.  \:B7  |nj  :  to  give 
before  a  person,  equivalent  to  give  up  to  a  person,  or  place  at  his  free 
disposal  (for  the  use  of  the  word  in  this  sense,  see  Gen.  xiii.  9,  xxxiv. 
10).  Jehovah  (this  is  the  idea  of  vers.  6-8),  when  He  concluded 
the  covenant  with  the  Israelites  at  Horeb,  had  intended  to  fulfil  at 
once  the  promise  which  He  gave  to  the  patriarchs,  and  to  put  them 
into  possession  of  the  promised  land ;  and  Moses  had  also  done  what 
was  required  on  his  part,  as  he  explained  in  vers.  9-18,  to  bring  the 
people  safely  to  Canaan  (cf.  Ex.  xviii.  23).  As  the  nation  had 
multiplied  as  the  stars  of  heaven,  in  accordance  with  the  promise 
of  the  Lord,  and  he  felt  unable  to  bear  the  burden  alone  and 
settle  all  disputes,  he  had  placed  over  them  at  that  time  wise  and 
intelligent  men  from  the  heads  of  the  tribes  to  act  as  judges,  and  had 
instructed  them  to  adjudicate  upon  the  smaller  matters  of  dispute 
righteously  and  without  respect  of  person.  For  further  particulai's 
concerning  the  appointment  of  the  judges,  see  at  Ex.  xviii.  13-26, 
where  it  is  related  how  Moses  adopted  this  plan  at  the  advice  of 
Jethro,  even  before  the  giving  of  the  law  at  Sinai.  The  expression 
"  at  that  time,''  in  ver.  9,  is  not  at  variance  with  this.   The  imperfect 


286  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

"IDKJ  with  vav  rel.^  expresses  the  order  of  thought  and  not  of  time. 
For  Moses  did  not  intend  to  recall  the  different  circumstances 
to  the  recollection  of  the  people  in  their  chronological  order,  but 
arranged  them  according  to  their  relative  importance  in  connection 
with  the  main  object  of  his  address.  And  this  required  that  he 
should  begin  with  what  God  had  done  for  the  fulfilment  of  His 
l^romise,  and  then  proceed  afterwards  to  notice  what  he,  the  servant 
of  God,  had  done  in  his  office,  as  an  altogether  subordinate  matter. 
So  far  as  this  object  was  concerned,  it  was  also  perfectly  indifferent 
who  had  advised  him  to  adopt  this  plan,  whilst  it  was  very  important 
to  allude  to  the  fact  that  it  was  the  great  increase  in  the  number  of 
the  Israelites  which  had  rendered  it  necessary,  that  he  might  remind 
the  congregation  how  the  Lord,  even  at  that  time,  had  fulfilled  the 
promise  which  He  gave  to  the  patriarchs,  and  in  that  fulfilment  had 
given  a  practical  guarantee  of  the  certain  fulfilment  of  the  other 
promises  as  well.  Moses  accomplished  this  by  describing  the  in- 
crease of  the  nation  in  such  a  way  that  his  hearers  would  be  invo- 
luntarily reminded  of  the  covenant  promise  in  Gen.  xv.  5  sqq.  (cf. 
Gen.  xii.  2,  xviii.  18,  xxii.  17,  xxvi.  4). — Ver.  11.  But  in  order  to 
guard  against  any  misinterpretation  of  his  words,  "  I  cannot  bear 
you  myself  alone,"  Moses  added,  "May  the  Lord  fulfil  the  promise 
of  numerous  increase  to  the  natioii  a  thousand-fold."  ''Jehovah^ 
the  God  of  your  fathers  {i.e.  who  manifested  Himself  as  God  to  your 
fathers),  add  to  you  a  thousand  times,  033^  as  many  as  ye  are,  and 
bless  you  as  He  has  saidJ^  The  "blessing"  after  "multiplying" 
points  back  to  Gen.  xii.  2.  Consequently,  it  is  not  to  be  restricted 
to  "strengthening,  rendering  fruitful,  and  multiplying,"  but  must 
be  understood  as  including  the  spiritual  blessing  promised  to  Abra- 
ham.— Yer.  12.  ''How  can  I  myself  alone  hear  your  cumhrance,  and 
your  burden,  and  your  strife  ?"  The  burden  and  cumbrance  of  the 
nation  are  the  nation  itself,  with  all  its  affairs  and  transactions, 
which  pressed  upon  the  shoulders  of  Moses. — Vers.  13  sqq.  DD?  ^nn^ 
give  here,  provide  for  yourselves.  The  congregation  was  to  nomi- 
nate, according  to  its  tribes,  wise,  intelligent,  and  well-known  men, 
whom  Moses  would  appoint  as  heads,  i.e.  as  judges,  over  the  nation. 
At  their  installation  he  gave  them  the  requisite  instructions  (ver.  16) : 
"  Ye  shall  hear  betvjeen  your  brethren,^'  i.e.  hear  both  parties  as  medi- 
ators, ''and  judge  righteously,  ivithout  respect  of  perso?iJ'  t3''i3  'T'3'7, 
to  look  at  the  face,  equivalent  to  D''^Q  fc^b'J  (Lev.  xix.  15),  i.e.  to  act 
partially  (cf.  Ex.  xxiii.  2,  3).  "  The  judgment  is  God^s,"  i.e.  ap- 
pointed by  God,  and  to  be  administered  in  the  name  of  God,  or  in 


I 


I 


CHAP.  I.  19-46.  287 

accordance  with  His  justice ;  hence  the  expression  "  to  hring  before 
God"  (Ex.  xxi.  6,  xxii.  7,  etc.).  On  the  difficult  cases  which  the 
judges  were  to  bring  before  Moses,  see  at  Ex.  xviii.  26. 

Vers.  19-46.  Everything  had  been  done  on  the  part  of  God  and 
Moses  to  bring  Israel  speedily  and  safely  to  Canaan.  The  reason 
for  their  being  compelled  to  remain  in  the  desert  for  forty  years  was 
to  be  found  exclusively  in  their  resistance  to  the  commandments  of 
God.  The  discontent  of  the  people  with  the  guidance  of  God  was 
manifested  at  the  very  first  places  of  encampment  in  the  desert 
(Num.  xi.  and  xii.)  ;  but  Moses  passed  over  this,  and  simply  re- 
minded them  of  the  rebellion  at  Kadesh  (Num.  xiii.  and  xiv.), 
because  it  was  this  which  was  followed  by  the  condemnation  of  the 
rebellious  generation  to  die  out  in  the  wilderness. — Ver.  19.  "  WIwi 
we  departed  from  Horeb,  we  passed  through  the  great  and  dreadful 
wildernessj  which  ye  have  seen^^  i,e,  become  acquainted  with,  viz. 
the  desert  of  et  Tih  (see  p.  57),  "  of  the  way  to  the  mountains  of 
the  Amorites,  and  came  to  Kadesh-Barnea^^  (see  at  Num.  xii.  16). 
^pn^  with  an  accusative,  to  pass  through  a  country  (cf.  chap.  ii.  7  ; 
Isa.  1.  10,  etc.).  Moses  had  there  explained  to  the  Israelites,  that 
they  had  reached  the  mountainous  country  of  the  Amorites,  which 
Jehovah  was  about  to  give  them ;  that  the  land  lay  before  them, 
and  they  might  take  possession  of  it  without  fear  (vers.  20,  21). 
But  they  proposed  to  send  out  men  to  survey  the  land,  with  its  towns, 
and  the  way  into  it.  Moses  approved  of  this  proposal,  and  sent  out 
twelve  men,  one  from  each  tribe,  who  went  through  the  land,  etc, 
(as  is  more  fully  related  in  Num.  xiii.,  and  has  been  expounded  in 
connection  with  that  passage,  vers.  22-25).  Moses'  summons  to 
them  to  take  the  land  (vers.  20,  21)  is  not  expressly,  mentioned 
there,  but  it  is  contained  implicite  in  the  fact  that  spies  were  sent 
out ;  as  the  only  possible  reason  for  doing  this  must  have  been,  that 
they  might  force  a  way  into  the  land,  and  take  possession  of  it.  In 
ver.  25,  Moses  simply  mentions  so  much  of  the  report  of  the  spies 
as  had  reference  to  the  nature  of  the  land,  viz.  that  it  was  good, 
that  he  may  place  in  immediate  contrast  with  this  the  refusal  of  the 
people  to  enter  in. — Vers.  26,  27.  ^^  But  ye  would  not  go  up,  and  were 
rebellious  against  the  mouth  (i.e.  the  express  will)  of  Jehovah  your 
Gody  and  murmured  in  your  tents,  and  said.  Because  Jehovah  hated 
us,  He  hath  brought  us  forth  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  to  give  us  into 
the  hand  of  the  Amorites  to  destroy  us,^*  "^^^'^j  either  an  infinitive 
with  a  feminine  termination,  or  a  verbal  noun  construed  with  an 
accusative  (see  Ges.  §  133 ;  Ewald,  §  238,  a.). — By  the  allusion  to  the 


288  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


murmuring  in  the  tents,  Moses  points  them  to  Num.  xiv.  1,  and  then 
proceeds  to  describe  the  rebeUion  of  the  congregation  related  there 
(vers.  2-4),  in  such  a  manner  that  the  state  of  mind  manifested  on 
that  occasion  presents  the  appearance  of  the  basest  ingratitude,  al 
inasmuch  as  the  people  declared  the  greatest  blessing  conferred  upon 
them  by  God,  viz.  their  deUverance  from  Egypt,  to  have  been  an 
act  of  hatred  on  His  part.  At  the  same  time,  by  addressing  the 
existing  members  of  the  nation,  as  if  they  themselves  had  spoken 
so,  whereas  the  whole  congregation  that  rebelled  at  Kadesh  had 
fallen  in  the  desert,  and  a  fresh  generation  was  now  gathered  round 
him,  Moses  points  to  the  fact,  that  the  sinful  corruption  which  broke 
out  at  that  time,  and  bore  such  bitter  fruit,  had  not  died  out  with  the 
older  generation,  but  was  germinating  still  in  the  existing  Israel, 
and  even  though  it  might  be  deeply  hidden  in  their  hearts,  would  be 
sure  to  break  forth  again. — ^Ver.  28.  "  Whither  shall  we  go  up  ?  Our 
brethren  (the  spies)  have  quite  discouraged  our  heart"  (opn,  lit,  to 
cause  to  flow  away;  cf.  Josh.  ii.  9),  viz.  through  their  report  (Num.BI 
xiii.  28,  29,  31-33),  the  substance  of  which  is  repeated  here. 
The  expression  l^^^g^S,  "  in  heaven,"  towering  up  into  heaven,  which 
is  added  to  "  towns  great  and  fortified"  is  not  an  exaggeration,  but, 
as  Moses  also  uses  it  in  chap.  ix.  1,  a  rhetorical  description  of  the 
impression  actually  received  with  regard  to  the  size  of  the  towns.^ 
"  The  sons  of  the  Anakims  ;*'  see  at  Num.  xiii.  22. — Vers.  29-31. 
The  attempt  made  by  Moses  to  inspire  the  despondent  people  with 
courage,  when  they  were  ready  to  despair  of  ever  conquering  the 
Canaanites,  by  pointing  them  to  the  help  of  the  Lord,  which  they 
had  experienced  in  so  mighty  and  visible  a  manner  in  Egypt  and 
the  desert,  •and  to  urge  them  to  renewed  confidence  in  this  their 
almighty  Helper  and  Guide,  was  altogether  without  success.  And 
just  because  the  appeal  of  Moses  was  unsuccessful,  it  is  passed  over 
in  the  historical  account  in  Num.  xiv. ;  all  that  is  mentioned  there 
(vers.  6-9)  being  the  effort  made  by  Joshua  and  Caleb  to  stir  up 
the  people,  and  that  on  account  of  the  effects  which  followed  the 
com'ageous  bearing  of  these  two  men,  so  far  as  their  own  future 
history  was  concerned.  The  w^ords  "  goeth  before  you"  in  ver.  30, 
are  resumed  in  ver.  33,  and  carried  out  still  further.    "  Jehovah,  .  .  . 

^  "  The  eyes  of  weak  faith  or  unbelief  saw  the  towns  really  towering  up  to 
heaven.  Nor  did  the  height  appear  less,  even  to  the  eyes  of  faith,  in  relation, 
that  is  to  say,  to  its  own  power.  Faith  does  not  hide  the  difficulties  from 
itself,  that  it  may  not  rob  the  Ijord,  who  helps  it  over  them,  of  any  of  the  praise 
that  is  justly  His  due"  {SchuUz). 


CHAP.  I.  19-46.  289 

He  shall  fight  for  you  according  to  all  (^^3)  that,^^  i.e.  in  exactly  the 
same  manner  as,  "  He  did  for  you  in  JEgypt"  especially  at  the  crossing 
of  the  Red  Sea  (Ex.  xiv.),  "  and  in  the  wilderness,  which  thou  hast  seen 
(n''S"),  as  in  ver.  19),  ichere  pP'^  without  )2  in  a  loose  connection  ;  see 
JEwald,  §  331,  c.  and  333,  a.)  Jehovah  thy  God  bore  thee  as  a  man  hear- 
eth  his  son ;"  i.e.  supported,  tended,  and  provided  for  thee  in  the  most 
fatherly  way  (see  the  similar  figure  in  Num.  xi.  12,  and  expanded 
still  more  fully  in  Ps.  xxiii.). — Vers.  32,  33.  ^' And  even  at  this  word 
ye  remained  unbelieving  towards  the  Lord ;"  i.e.  notwithstanding  the 
fact  that  I  reminded  you  of  all  the  gracious  help  that  ye  had  expe- 
rienced from  your  God,  ye  persisted  in  your  unbelief.  The  parti- 
ciple C)J''pxn  D3;''i<,  "  ye  ivere  not  believing,'^  is  intended  to  describe 
their  unbelief  as  a  permanent  condition.  This  unbelief  was  all  the 
more  grievous  a  sin,  because  the  Lord  their  God  went  before  them 
all  the  way  in  the  pillar  of  cloud  and  fire,  to  guide  and  to  defend 
them.  On  the  fact  itself,  comp.  Num.  ix.  15  sqq.,  x.  33,  with  Ex. 
xiii.  21,  22. — Vers.  34-36.  Jehovah  was  angry,  therefore,  when  He 
heard  these  loud  words,  and  swore  that  He  would  not  let  any  one 
of  those  men,  that  evil  generation,  enter  the  promised  land,  with  the 
exception  of  Caleb,  because  he  had  followed  the  Lord  faithfully 
(cf.  Num.  xiv.  21-24).  The  yod  in  ""np^T  is  the  antiquated  connect- 
ing vowel  of  the  construct  state. 

But  in  order  that  he  might  impress  upon  the  people  the  judg- 
ment of  the  holy  God  in  all  its  stern  severity,  Moses  added  in  ver. 
37  :  "  also  Jehovah  was  angry  with  me  for  your  sakes,  saying,  Thou 
also  shalt  not  go  in  thither;'''  and  he  did  this  before  mentioning 
Joshua,  who  was  excepted  from  the  judgment  as  well  as  Caleb, 
because  his  ultimate  intention  was  to  impress  also  upon  the  minds 
of  the  people  the  fact,  that  even  in  wrath  the  Lord  had  been  mind- 
ful of  His  covenant,  and  when  pronouncing  the  sentence  upon  His 
servant  Moses,  had  given  the  people  a  leader  in  the  person  of 
Joshua,  who  was  to  bring  them  into  the  promised  inheritance.  We 
are  not  to  infer  from  the  close  connection  in  which  this  event,  which 
did  not  take  place  according  to  Num.  xx.  1-13  till  the  second 
arrival  of  the  congi'egation  at  Kadesh,  is  placed  with  the  earlier 
judgment  of  God  at  Kadesh,  that  the  two  were  contemporaneous, 
and  so  supply,  after  "  the  Lord  was  angry  with  me,"  the  words 
"  on  that  occasion."  For  Moses  did  not  intend  to  teach  the  people 
history  and  chronology,  but  to  set  before  them  the  holiness  of  the 
judgments  of  the  Lord.  By  using  the  expression  "  for  your  sakes," 
Moses  did  not  wish  to  free  himself  from  guilt.     Even  in  this  book 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  T 


290  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

his  sin  at  the  water  of  strife  is  not  passed  over  in  silence  (cf.  chap. 
xxxii.  51).  But  on  the  present  occasion,  if  he  had  given  promi- 
nence to  his  own  fault,  he  would  have  weakened  the  object  for 
which  he  referred  to  this  event,  viz.  to  stimulate  the  consciences  of 
the  people,  and  instil  into  them  a  wholesome  dread  of  sin,  by  hold- 
ing up  before  them  the  magnitude  of  their  guilt.  But  in  order 
that  he  might  give  no  encouragement  to  false  security  respecting 
their  own  sin,  on  the  ground  that  even  highly  gifted  men  of  God 
fall  into  sin  as  well,  Moses  simply  pointed  out  the  fact,  that  the 
quarrelling  of  the  people  with  him  occasioned  the  wrath  of  God  to 
fall  upon  him  also. — Yer.  38.  "  Who  standeth  before  thee"  equiva- 
lent to  "  in  thy  service"  (Ex.  xxiv.  13,  xxxiii.  11 :  for  this  mean- 
ing, see  chap.  x.  8,  xviii.  7  ;  1  Kings  i.  28).  "  Strengthen  him:" 
comp.  chap.  xxxi.  7  ;  and  with  regard  to  the  installation  of  Joshua 
as  the  leader  of  Israel,  see  Num.  xxvii.  18, 19.  The  suffix  in  napTiJ^ 
points  back  to  T}^[}  in  ver.  35.  Joshua  would  divide  the  land 
among  the  Israelites  for  an  inheritance,  viz.  (ver.  39)  among  the 
young  Israelites,  the  children  of  the  condemned  generation,  whom 
Moses,  when  making  a  further  communication  of  the  judicial  sen- 
tence of  God  (Num.  xiv.  31),  had  described  as  having  no  share  in 
the  sins  of  their  parents,  by  adding,  "  who  know  not  to-day  what 
is  good  and  evil."  This  expression  is  used  to  denote  a  condition  of 
spiritual  infancy  and  moral  responsibility  (Isa.  vii.  15,  16).  It  is 
different  in  2  Sam.  xix.  36. — In  vers.  40-45  he  proceeds  to  describe 
still  further,  according  to  Num.  xiv.  39-45,  how  the  people,  by  re- 
sisting the  command  of  God  to  go  back  into  the  desert  (ver.  41, 
compared  with  Num.  xiv.  25),  had  simply  brought  still  greater 
calamities  upon  themselves,  and  had  had  to  atone  for  the  presump- 
tuous attempt  to  force  a  way  into  Canaan,  in  opposition  to  the 
express  will  of  the  Lord,  by  enduring  a  miserable  defeat.  Instead 
of  "  they  acted  presumptuously  to  go  up  "  (Num.  xiv.  44),  Moses 
says  here,  in  ver.  41,  "  ye  acted  frivolously  to  go  up ;"  and  in  ver. 
43,  "  ye  acted  rashly,  and  went  upT  "171??  from  ^^t,  to  boil,  or  boil 
over  (Gen.  xxv.  29),  signifies  to  act  thoughtlessly,  haughtily,  or 
rashly.  On  the  particular  fact  mentioned  in  ver.  44,  see  at  Num. 
14,  45. — ^Vers.  45,  46.  "  Then  ye  returned  and  wept  before  Jehovah" 
i.e.  before  the  sanctuary ;  "  but  Jehovah  did  not  hearken  to  your 
voice."  y^^  does  not  refer  to  the  return  to  Kadesli,  but  to  an  inward 
turning,  not  indeed  true  conversion  to  repentance,  but  simply  the 
giving  up  of  their  rash  enterprise,  which  they  had  undertaken  in. 
opposition  to  the  commandment  of  God, — the  return  from  a  defiant 


CHAP.  II.  1-28.  291 

attitude  to  unbelieving  complaining  on  account  of  the  misfortune  that 
had  come  upon  them.  Such  complaining  God  never  hears.  "  And 
ye  sat  (remained)  in  Kadesh  many  days,  that  ye  remainedy^  i.e.  not 
"  as  many  days  as  ye  had  been  there  already  before  the  return  of  the 
spies,"  or  "  as  long  as  ye  remained  in  all  the  other  stations  together, 
viz.  the  half  of  thirty-eight  years"  (as  Seder  Olam  and  many  of  the 
Rabbins  interpret) ;  but  "  just  as  long  as  ye  did  remain  there,"  as  we 
may  see  from  a  comparison  of  chap.  ix.  25.  It  seemed  superfluous 
to  mention  more  precisely  the  time  they  spent  in  Kadesh,  because 
that  was  well  known  to  the  people,  whom  Moses  was  addressing.  He 
therefore  contented  himself  with  fixing  it  by  simply  referring  to  its 
duration,  which  was  known  to  them  all.  It  is  no  doubt  impossible 
for  us  to  determine  the  time  they  remained  in  Kadesh,  because  the 
expression  "  many  days  "  is  simply  a  relative  one,  and  may  signify 
many  years,  just  as  well  as  many  months  or  weeks.  But  it  by  no 
means  warrants  the  assumption  of  Fries  and  others,  that  no  abso- 
lute departure  of  the  whole  of  the  people  from  Kadesh  ever  took 
place.  Such  an  assumption  is  at  variance  with  chap.  ii.  1.  The 
change  of  subjects,  "  ye  sat,"  etc.  (ver.  46),  and  "  we  turned  and 
removed "  (chap.  ii.  1),  by  no  means  proves  that  Moses  only  went 
away  with  that  part  of  the  congregation  which  attached  itself  to 
him,  whilst  the  other  portion,  which  was  most  thoroughly  estranged 
from  him,  or  rather  from  the  Lord,  remained  there  still.  The 
change  of  subject  is  rather  to  be  explained  from  the  fact  that 
Moses  was  passing  from  the  consideration  of  the  events  in  Kadesh, 
which  he  held  up  before  the  people  as  a  warning,  to  a  description 
of  the  further  guidance  of  Israel.  The  reference  to  those  events 
had  led  him  involuntarily,  from  ver.  22  onwards,  to  distinguish 
between  himself  and  the  people,  and  to  address  his  words  to  them 
for  the  purpose  of  bringing  out  their  rebellion  against  God.  And 
now  that  he  had  finished  with  this,  he  returned  to  the  communica- 
tive mode  of  address  with  which  he  set  out  in  ver.  6,  but  which  he 
had  suspended  again  until  ver.  19. 

REVIEW  OF  THE  DIVINE  GUIDANCE  OF  ISRAEL  ROUND  EDOM 
AND  MOAB  TO  THE  FRONTIER  OF  THE  AJVIORITES,  AND  OF  THE 
GRACIOUS  ASSISTANCE  AFFORDED  BY  THE  LORD  IN  THE  CON- 
QUEST OF  THE  KINGDOMS  OF  SIHON  AND  OG. — CHAP.  II.  AND  III. 

Vers.  1-23.  March  from  Kadesh  to  the  Frontier  of  the 
Amorites. — ^Yer.  1.  After  a  long  stay  in  Kadesh,  they  commenced 


292  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

their  return  into  the  desert.  The  words,  "  We  departed  .  .  .  by  (he 
tuay  to  the  Red  Sea"  point  back  to  Num.  xiv.  25.  This  departure 
is  expressly  designated  as  an  act  of  obedience  to  the  divine  command 
recorded  there,  by  the  expression  " as  Jehovah  spake  to  me"  Con- 
sequently Moses  is  not  speaking  here  of  the  second  departure  of  the 
congregation  from  Kadesh  to  go  to  Mount  Hor  (Num.  xx.  22), 
but  of  the  first  departure  after  the  condemnation  of  the  generation 
that  came  out  of  Egypt.  "  And  we  went  round  Mount  Seir  many 
days"  This  going  round  Mount  Seir  includes  the  thirty-eight  years' 
wanderings,  though  we  are  not  therefore  to  picture  it  as  "  going 
backwards  and  forwards,  and  then  entering  the  Arabah  again" 
(Schultz).  Just  as  Moses  passed  over  the  reassembling  of  the  con- 
gregation at  Kadesh  (Num.  xx.  1),  so  he  also  overlooked  the  going 
to  and  fro  in  the  desert,  and  fixed  his  eye  more  closely  upon  the 
last  journey  from  Kadesh  to  Mount  Hor,  that  he  might  recall  to  the 
memory  of  the  congregation  how  the  Lord  had  led  them  to  the  end 
of  all  their  wandering. — Vers.  2  sqq.  When  they  had  gone  through 
the  Arabah  to  the  southern  extremity,  the  Lord  commanded  them 
to  turn  northwards,  i.e.  to  go  round  the  southern  end  of  Mount  Seir, 
and  proceed  northwards  on  the  eastern  side  of  it  (see  at  Num.  xxi. 
10),  without  going  to  war  with  the  Edomites  ('^"J?^'?,  to  stir  one- 
self up  against  a  person  to  conflict,  nonpo)^  as  He  would  not  give 
them  a  foot-breadth  of  their  land ;  for  He  had  given  Esau  (the 
Edomites)  Mount  Seir  for  a  possession.  For  this  reason  they  were 
to  buy  victuals  and  water  of  them  for  money  (p'l^,  to  dig,  to  dig 
water,  i.e.  procure  water,  as  it  was  often  necessary  to  dig  wells,  and 
not  merely  to  draw  it.  Gen.  xxvi.  25.  The  verb  nn3  does  not 
signify  to  buy). — Yer.  7.  And  this  they  were  able  to  do,  because 
the  Lord  had  blessed  them  in  all  the  work  of  their  hand,  i.e.  not 
merely  in  the  rearing  of  flocks  and  herds,  which  they  had  carried 
on  in  the  desert  (Ex.  xix.  13,  xxxiv.  3 ;  Num.  xx.  19,  xxxii.  1  sqq.), 
but  in  all  that  they  did  for  a  living ;  whether,  for  example,  when 
stopping  for  a  long  time  in  the  same  place  of  encampment,  they 
sowed  in  suitable  spots  and  reaped,  or  whether  they  sold  the  produce 
of  their  toil  and  skill  to  the  Arabs  of  the  desert.  "  He  hath  observed 
thy  going  through  this  great  desert  ^^  (Vy,  to  know,  then  to  trouble 
oneself.  Gen.  xxxix.  6 ;  to  observe  carefully,  Prov.  xxvii.  23,  Ps. 
i.  6)  ;  and  He  has  not  suffered  thee  to  want  anything  for  forty 
years,  but  as  often  as  want  has  occurred.  He  has  miraculously 
provided  for  every  necessity. — Yer.  8.  In  accordance  with  this 
divine  command,  they  went  past  the  Edomites  by  the  side  of  their 


J 


CHAP.  II.  1-23.  293 

mountains,  ^^  from  the  loay  of  the  Arahah,  from  Elath  (see  at  Gen. 
xiv.  6)  and  Eziongeber"  (see  at  Num.  xxxiii.  35),  sc.  into  the 
steppes  of  Moab,  where  they  were  encamped  at  that  time. 

God  commanded  them  to  behave  in  the  same  manner  towards 
the  Moabites,  when  they  approached  their  frontier  (ver.  9).  They 
were  not  to  touch  their  land,  because  the  Lord  had  given  Ar  to  the 
descendants  of  Lot  for  a  possession.  In  ver.  9  the  Moabites  are 
mentioned,  and  in  ver.  19  the  Amorites  also.  The  Moabites  are 
designated  as  "  sons  of  Lot,"  for  the  same  reason  for  which  the 
Edomites  are  called  "  brethren  of  Israel "  in  ver.  4.  The  Israelites 
were  to  uphold  the  bond  of  blood-relationship  with  these  tribes  in 
the  most  sacred  manner.  Ar^  the  capital  of  Moabitis  (see  at  Num. 
xxi.  15),  is  used  here  for  the  land  itself,  which  was  namecl  after  the 
capital,  and  governed  by  it. — Vers.  11,  12.  To  confirm  the  fact  that 
the  Moabites  and  also  the  Edomites  had  received  from  God  the 
land  which  they  inhabited  as  a  possession,  Moses  interpolates  into 
the  words  of  Jehovah  certain  ethnographical  notices  concerning  the 
earlier  inhabitants  of  these  lands,  from  which  it  is  obvious  that 
Edom  and  Moab  had  not  destroyed  them  by  their  own  power,  but 
that  Jehovah  had  destroyed  them  before  them,  as  is  expressly  stated 
in  vers.  21,  22.  "  The  Emim  dwelt  formerly  therein^^  sc.  in  Ar  and 
its  territory,  in  Moabitis,  "  a  high  (i.e.  strong)  and  numerous  people, 
of  gigantic  stature,  ivhich  were  also  reckoned  among  the  Rephaites, 
like  the  Enakites  (Anakim)J*  Emim,  i.e.  frightful,  terrible,  was 
the  name  given  to  them  by  the  Moabites.  Whether  this  earlier  or 
original  population  of  Moabitis  was  of  Hamitic  or  Semitic  descent 
cannot  be  determined,  any  more  than  the  connection  between  the 
Emim  and  the  Rephaim  can  be  ascertained.  On  the  Rephaim,  see 
vol.  i.  p.  203 ;  and  on  the  Anakites,  at  Num.  xiii.  22. — Ver.  12. 
The  origin  of  the  Horites  {i.e.  the  dwellers  in  caves)  of  Mount  Seir, 
who  were  driven  out  of  their  possessions  by  the  descendants  of  Esau, 
and  completely  exterminated  (see  at  Gen.  xiv.  6,  and  xxxvi.  20),  is 
altogether  involved  in  obscurity.  The  words,  "  as  Israel  has  done 
to  the  land  of  his  possession,  which  Jehovah  has  given  them,"  do  not 
presuppose  the  conquest  of  the  land  of  Canaan  or  a  post-Mosaic 
authorship  ;  but  "  the  land  of  his  possession"  is  the  land  to  the  east 
of  the  Jordan  (Gilead  and  Bashan),  which  was  conquered  by  the 
Israelites  under  Moses,  and  divided  among  the  two  tribes  and  a  half, 
and  which  is  also  described  in  chap.  iii.  20  as  the  "  possession " 
which  Jehovah  had  given  to  these  tribes. — Vers.  13-15.  For  this 
reason  Israel  was  to  remove  from  the  desert  of  Moab  (i.e.  the  desert 


294  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

which  bounded  Moabitis  on  the  east),  and  to  cross  over  the  brook 
Zeredy  to  advance  against  the  country  of  the  Amorites  (see  at  Num. 
xxi.  12,  13).  This  occurred  thirty-eight  years  after  the  condem- 
nation of  the  people  at  Kadesh  (Num.  xiv.  23,  29),  when  the 
generation  rejected  by  God  had  entirely  died  out  ip^'^,  to  be  all 
gone,  to  disappear),  so  that  not  one  of  them  saw  the  promised  land. 
They  did  not  all  die  a  natural  death,  however,  but  "  the  hand  of  the 
Lord  was  against  them  to  destroy  them  "  (D^!^,  lit.  to  throw  into  con- 
fusion, then  used  with  special  reference  to  the  terrors  with  which 
Jehovah  destroyed  His  enemies ;  Ex.  xiv.  24,  xxiii.  27,  etc.),  sc.  by 
extraordinary  judgments  (as  in  Num.  xvi.  35,  xvii.  14,  xxi.  6,  xxv. 
9). — Vers.  16-19.  When  this  generation  had  quite  died  out,  the 
Lord  made  known  to  Moses,  and  through  him  to  the  people,  that 
they  were  to  cross  over  the  boundary  of  Moab  (i.e.  the  Anion,  ver. 
24 ;  see  at  Num.  xxi.  13),  the  land  of  Ar  (see  at  ver.  9),  "  to  come 
nigh  over  against  the  children  of  Ammon^^  i.e.  to  advance  into  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  Ammonites,  who  lived  to  the  east  of  Moab  ; 
but  they  were  not  to  meddle  with  these  descendants  of  Lot,  because 
He  would  give  them  nothing  of  the  land  that  was  given  them  for  a 
possession  (ver.  19,  as  at  vers.  5  and  9). — To  confirm  this,  ethno- 
graphical notices  are  introduced  again  in  vers.  20-22  into  the  words 
of  God  (as  in  vers.  10,  11),  concerning  the  earlier  population  of 
the  country  of  the  Ammonites.  Ammonitis  was  also  regarded  as 
a  land  of  the  Rephaites,  because  Rephaites  dwelt  therein,  whom 
the  Ammonites  called  Zamzummim.  "  Zamztiminim,"  from  D^T,  to 
hum,  then  to  muse,  equivalent  to  the  humming  or  roaring  people, 
probably  the  same  people  as  the  Zuzim  mentioned  in  Gen.  xiv.  5. 
This  giant  tribe  Jehovah  had  destroyed  before  the  Ammonites 
(ver.  22),  just  as  He  had  done  for  the  sons  of  Esau  dwelling  upon 
Mount  Seir,  namely,  destroyed  the  Horites  before  them,  so  that  the 
Edomites  "  dwelt  in  their  stead,  even  unto  this  day." — Ver.  23. 
As  the  Horites  had  been  exterminated  by  the  Edomites,  so  were  the 
Avvceans  (Avvim),  who  dwelt  in  farms  (villages)  at  the  south-west 
corner  of  Canaan,  as  far  as  Gaza,  driven  out  of  their  possessions 
and  exterminated  by  the  Caphtorites,  who  sprang  from  Caphtor  (see 
at  Gen.  x.  14),  although,  according  to  Josh.  xiii.  3,  some  remnants 
of  them  were  to  be  found  among  the  Philistines  even  at  that  time. 
This  notice  appears  to  be  attached  to  the  foregoing  remarks  simply 
on  account  of  the  substantial  analogy  between  them,  without  there 
being  any  intention  to  imply  that  the  Israelites  were  to  assume  the 
same  attitude  towards  the  Caphtorites,  who  afterwards  rose  uj)  in 


CHAP.  II.  24-37.  295 

the  persons  of  the  Philistines,  as  towards  the  descendants  of  Esau 
and  Lot. 

Vers.  24-37.  The  Help  of  God  in  the  Conquest  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Sihon. — Vers.  24  sqq.  Whereas  the  Israelites  were 
not  to  make  war  upon  the  kindred  tribes  of  Edomites,  Moabites, 
and  Ammonites,  or  drive  them  out  of  the  possessions  given  to  them 
by  God ;  the  Lord  had  given  the  Amorites,  w^ho  had  forced  a  way 
into  Gilead  and  Bashan,  into  their  hands. — Vers.  24,  25.  While 
they  were  encamped  on  the  Arnon,  the  border  of  the  Amoritish 
king  of  Sihon,  He  directed  them  to  cross  this  frontier  and  take  pos- 
session of  the  land  of  Sihon,  and  promised  that  He  would  give  this 
king  with  all  his  territor}'  into  their  hands,  and  that  henceforward 
("  this  day^^  the  day  on  which  Israel  crossed  the  Arnon)  He  would 
put  fear  and  terror  of  Israel  upon  all  nations  under  the  whole 
heaven,  so  that  as  soon  as  they  heard  the  report  of  Israel  they 
would  tremble  and  writhe  before  them,  tn  pnn^  "  begin,  take,^^  an 
oratorical  expression  for  "  begin  to  take  "  (En  in  pause  for  ^,,  chap, 
i.  21).  The  expression,  " all  nations  under  the  whole  heaven"  is 
hyperbolical ;  it  is  not  to  be  restricted,  however,  to  the  Canaanites 
and  other  neighbouring  tribes,  but,  according  to  what  follows,  to  be 
understood  as  referring  to  all  nations  to  whom  the  report  of  the 
great  deeds  of  the  Lord  upon  and  on  behalf  of  Israel  should  reach 
(cf.  chap.  xi.  25  and  Ex.  xxiii.  27).  "IK'X,  so  that  (as  in  Gen.  xi.  7, 
xiii.  16,  xxii.  14).  vni,  with  the  accent  upon  the  last  syllable,  on 
account  of  the  ^  consec.  {Eivald,  §  234,  a.),  from  ^^n,  to  twist,  or 
writhe  with  pain,  here  with  anxiety. — Vers.  26-29.  If  Moses,  not- 
withstanding this,  sent  messengers  to  king  Sihon  with  words  of 
peace  (vers.  26  sqq. ;  cf.  Num.  xxi.  21  sqq.),  this  was  done  to 
show  the  king  of  the  Amorites,  that  it  was  through  his  own  fault 
that  his  kingdom  and  lands  and  life  were  lost.  The  wash  to  pass 
through  his  land  in  a  peaceable  manner  was  quite  seriously  ex- 
pressed ;  although  Moses  foresaw,  in  consequence  of  the  divine 
communication,  that  he  would  reject  his  proposal,  and  meet  Israel 
with  hostilities.  For  Sihon's  kingdom  did  not  form  part  of  the  land 
of  Canaan,  which  God  had  promised  to  the  patriarchs  for  their 
descendants ;  and  the  divine  foreknowledge  of  the  hardness  of  Sihon 
no  more  destroyed  the  freedom  of  his  will  to  resolve,  or  the  freedom 
of  his  actions,  than  the  circumstance  that  in  ver.  30  the  unwilling- 
ness of  Sihon  is  described  as  the  effect  of  his  being  hardened  by 
God  Himself.     The  hardening  was  quite  as  much  the  production 


296  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


of  human  freedom  and  guilt,  as  the  consequence  of  the  divine 
decree ;  just  as  in  the  case  of  Pharaoh  (see  the  discussion  in  vol.  i. 
pp.  453  sqq.).  On  Kedemoth,  see  p.  144.  '^'y^^  '^Tih  equivalent  to 
"  upon  the  way,  and  always  upon  the  way,"  i.e.  upon  the  high  road 
alone,  as  in  Num.  xx.  19.  On  the  behaviour  of  the  Edomites 
towards  Israel,  mentioned  in  ver.  29,  see  p.  142.  In  the  same  way 
the  Moabites  also  supplied  Israel  with  provisions  for  money.  This 
statement  is  not  at  variance  with  the  unbrotherly  conduct  for  which 
the  Moabites  are  blamed  in  chap,  xxiii.  4,  viz.  that  they  did  not 
meet  the  Israelites  with  bread  and  water.  For  D^p,  to  meet  and 
anticipate,  signifies  a  hospitable  reception,  the  offering  of  food  and 
drink  without  reward,  which  is  essentially  different  from  selling  for 
money.  "  In  Ar  "  (ver.  29),  as  in  ver.  18.  The  suffix  in  i2  (ver. 
30)  refers  to  the  king,  who  is  mentioned  as  the  lord  of  the  land,  in 
the  place  of  the  land  itself,  just  as  in  Num.  xx.  18. — Ver.  31.  The 
refusal  of  Sihon  was  suspended  over  him  by  God  as  a  judgment  of 
hardening,  which  led  to  his  destruction.  ''As  this  day^^  an  abbre- 
viation of  "  as  it  has  happened  this  day,"  i.e.  as  experience  has  now 
shown  (cf.  chap.  iv.  20,  etc.). — Vers.  32-37.  Defeat  of  Sihon,  as 
already  described  in  the  main  in  Num.  xxi.  23-26.  The  war  was  a 
war  of  extermination,  in  which  all  the  towns  were  laid  under  the 
ban  (see  Lev.  xxvii.  29),  i.e.  the  whole  of  the  population  of  men, 
women,  and  children  were  put  to  death,  and  only  the  flocks  and 
herds  and  material  possessions  were  taken  by  the  conquerors  as 
prey. — Ver.  34.  DHp  "T'y  (city  of  men)  is  the  town  population  of 
men. — Ver.  36.  They  proceeded  this  way  with  the  whole  of  the 
kingdom  of  Sihon.  "  From  Aroer  on  the  edge  of  the  Arnon  valley 
(see  at  Num.  xxxii.  34),  aiid,  in  fact,  from  the  city  which  is  in  the 
valley,^  i.e.  Ar,  or  Areopolis  (see  at  Num.  xxi.  15), — Aroer  being 
mentioned  as  the  inclusive  terminus  a  quo  of  the  land  that  was 
taken,  and  the  Moabitish  capital  Ar  as  the  exclusive  terminus,  as  in 
Josh.  xiii.  9  and  16;  ''and  as  far  as  Gilead,"  which  rises  on  the 
north,  near  the  Jabbok  (or  Zerka,  see  at  chap.  iii.  4),  "  there  was  no 
town  too  high  for  its,"  i.e.  so  strong  that  we  could  not  take  it. — Ver. 
37.  Only  along  the  land  of  the  Ammonites  the  Israelites  did  not 
come,  namely,  along  the  whole  of  the  side  of  the  brook  Jabbok,  or 
the  country  of  the  Ammonites,  which  was  situated  upon  the  eastern 
side  of  the  upper  Jabbok,  and  the  towns  of  the  mountain,  i.e.  of  the 
Ammonitish  highlands,  and  "  to  all  that  the  Lord  had  commanded,'^ 
sc.  commanded  them  not  to  remove.  The  statement,  in  Josh  xiii. 
25,  that  the  half  of  the  country  of  the  Ammonites  was  given  to  the 


^^   V 


CHAP.  III.  1-11.  297 

tribe  of  Gad,  is  not  at  variance  with  this ;  for  the  allusion  there  is 
to  that  portion  of  the  land  of  the  Ammonites  which  was  between  the 
Amon  and  the  Jabbok,  and  which  had  already  been  taken  from  the 
Ammonites  by  the  Amorites  under  Sihon  (of.  Judg.  xi.  13  sqq.). 

Chap.  iii.  1-11.  The  Help  of  God  in  the  Conquest  of 
THE  Kingdom  of  Og  of  Bashan. — Vers.  1  sqq.  After  the  defeat 
of  king  Sihon  and  the  conquest  of  his  land,  the  Israelites  were  able 
to  advance  to  the  Jordan.  But  as  the  powerful  Amoritish  king 
Og  still  held  the  northern  half  of  Gilead  and  all  Bashan,  they 
proceeded  northwards  at  once  and  took  the  road  to  Bashan,  that 
they  might  also  defeat  this  king,  whom  the  Lord  had  likewise 
given  into  their  hand,  and  conquer  his  country  (cf.  Num.  xxi. 
33,  34).  They  smote  him  at  Edrei,  the  modern  Draa  (see  p.  155), 
without  leaving  him  even  a  remnant;  and  took  all  his  towns, 
i.e.,  as  is  here  more  fully  stated  in  vers.  4  sqq.,  '^  sixty  towns, 
the  whole  region  of  Argoh,  the  kingdom  of  Og  in  Bashan!^  These 
three  definitions  refer  to  one  and  the  same  country.  The  whole 
region  of  Argoh  included  the  sixty  towns  which  formed  the  king- 
dom of  Og  in  Bashan,  i.e.  all  the  towns  of  the  land  of  Bashan,  viz. 
(according  to  ver.  5)  all  the  fortified  towns,  besides  the  unfortified 
and  open  country  towns  of  Bashan.  /'^n,  the  chain  for  measuring, 
then  the  land  or  country  measured  with  the  chain.  The  name 
"  region  of  Argoh^^  which  is  given  to  the  country  of  Bashan  here, 
and  in  vers.  4,  13, 14,  and  also  in  1  Kings  iv.  13,  is  probably  derived 
from  nii"i,  stone-heaps,  related  to  ^Jn,  a  clump  or  clod  of  earth  (Job 
xxi.  33,  xxxviii.  38).  The  Targumists  have  rendered  it  correctly 
Xjbnp  {Trachona),  from  rpa'x^v,  a  rough,  uneven,  stony  district,  so 
called  from  the  basaltic  hills  of  Hauran ;  just  as  the  plain  to  the 
east  of  Jebel  Hauran,  which  resembles  Hauran  itself,  is  sometimes 
called  Tellul,  from  its  tells  or  hills  {Burchhardt,  Syr.  p.  173).^  This 
district  has  also  received  the  name  of  Bashan,  from  the  character 
of  its  soil ;  for  ]^'^  signifies  a  soft  and  level  soil.  From  the  name 
given  to  it  by  the  Arabic  translators,  the  Greek  name  Baravaia, 
Batancea,  and  possibly  also  the  modern  name  of  the  country  on  the 
north-eastern  slope  of  Hauran  at  the  back  of  Mount  Hauran, 
viz.  Bethenije,  are  derived. — The  name  Argoh  probably  originated 
in  the  north-eastern  part  of  the  country  of  Bashan,  viz.  the  modern 

^  The  derivation  is  a  much  more  improbable  one,  "  from  the  town  of  Argoh ^ 
vpog  Tepxauv  -ttoMv  'Apxiitxs-,  according  to  the  Onomast.,  fifteen  Roman  miles  to 
the  west  of  Gerasa^  which  is  called  'FccyxiSx  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  15,  5)." 


298  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Leja,  with  its  stony  soil  covered  with  heaps  of  large  blocks  of  stone 
(Burckhardty  p.  196),  or  rather  in  the  extensive  volcanic  region  to 
the  east  of  Hauran,  which  was  first  of  all  brought  to  distinct  notice 
in  Wetzstein^s  travels,  and  of  which  he  says  that  the  "southern 
portion,  bearing  the  name  Harra,  is  thickly  covered  with  loose 
volcanic  stones,  with  a  few  conical  hills  among  them,  that  have 
been  evidently  caused  by  eruptions  "  (  Wetzstein,  p.  6).  The  cen- 
tral point  of  the  whole  is  Safa,  "  a  mountain  nearly  seven  hours' 
journey  in  length  and  about  the  same  in  breadth,"  in  which  "  the 
black  mass  streaming  from  the  craters  piled  itself  up  wave  upon 
wave,  so  that  the  centre  attained  to  the  height  of  a  mountain, 
without  acquiring  the  smoothness  of  form  observable  in  mountains 
generally," — "the  black  flood  of  lava  being  full  of  innumerable 
streams  of  stony  waves,  often  of  a  bright  red  colour,  bridged  over 
with  thin  arches,  which  rolled  down  the  slopes  out  of  the  craters 
and  across  the  high  plateau"  (Wetzstein,  pp.  6  and  7).  At  a  later 
period  this  name  was  transferred  to  the  whole  of  the  district  of 
Hauran  ( =  Bashan),  because  not  only  is  the  Jebel  Hauran  en- 
tirely of  volcanic  formation,  but  the  plain  consists  throughout  of  a 
reddish  brown  soil  produced  by  the  action  of  the  weather  upon 
volcanic  stones,  and  even  "the  Leja  plain  has  been  poured  out 
from  the  craters  of  the  Hauran  mountains"  {Wetzsiein^  p.  23). 
Through  this  volcanic  character  of  the  soil,  Hauran  differs  essen- 
tially from  Belka,  Jebel  Ajlun,  and  the  plain  of  Jaulan,  which  is 
situated  between  the  Sea  of  Galilee  and  the  upper  Jordan  on  the 
one  side,  and  the  plain  of  Hauran  on  the  other,  and  reaches  up  to 
the  southern  slope  of  the  Hermon.  In  these  districts  the  limestone 
and  chalk  formations  prevail,  which  present  the  same  contrast  to 
the  basaltic  formation  of  the  Hauran  as  white  does  to  black  (cf.  v, 
Baumer,  Pal.  pp.  75  sqq.). — The  land  of  the  limestone  and  chalk 
formation  abounds  in  caves,  which  are  not  altogether  wanting 
indeed  in  Hauran  (as  v,  Raumer  supposes),  though  they  are  only 
found  in  eastern  and  south-eastern  Hauran,  where  most  of  the 
volcanic  elevations  have  been  perforated  by  troglodytes  (see  Wetz- 
stein,  pp.  92  and  44  sqq.).  But  the  true  land  of  caves  on  the 
east  of  the  Jordan  is  northern  Gilead,  viz.  Erhed  and  Suet  (  Wetzst, 
p.  92).  Here  the  troglodyte  dwellings  predominate,  whereas  in 
Hauran  you  find  for  the  most  part  towns  and  villages  with  houses 
of  one  or  more  stories  built  above  the  surface  of  the  ground, 
although  even  on  the  eastern  slope  of  the  Hauran  mountains  there 
are  hamlets  to  be  seen,  in  which  the  style  of  building  forms  a 


CHAP.  111.  1-11.  299 

transition  from  actual  caves  to  dwellings  built  upon  the  ground. 
An  excavation  is  first  of  all  made  in  the  rocky  plateau,  of  the 
breadth  and  depth  of  a  room,  and  this  is  afterwards  arched  over 
with  a  solid  stone  roof.  The  dwellings  made  in  this  manner  have 
all  the  appearance  of  cellars  or  tunnels.  This  style  of  building, 
such  as  Wetzstein  found  in  Hihhike  for  example,  belongs  to  the 
most  remote  antiquity.  In  some  cases,  hamlets  of  this  kind  were 
even  surrounded  by  a  wall.  Those  villages  of  Hauran  which  are 
built  above  the  surface  of  the  ground,  attract  the  eye  and  stimulate 
the  imagination,  when  seen  from  a  distance,  in  various  ways.  "  In 
the  first  place,  the  black  colour  of  the  building  materials  presents 
the  greatest  contrast  to  the  green  around  them,  and  to  the  trans- 
parent atmosphere  also.  In  the  second  place,  the  height  of  the 
walls  and  the  compactness  of  the  houses,  which  always  form  a 
connected  whole,  are  very  imposing.  In  the  third  place,  they  are 
surmounted  by  strong  towers.  And  in  the  fourth  place,  they  are  in 
such  a  good  state  of  preservation,  that  you  involuntarily  yield  to  the 
delusion  that  they  must  of  necessity  be  inhabited,  and  expect  to 
see  people  going  out  and  in  "  (  Wetzstein,  p.  49).  The  larger  towns 
are  surrounded  by  walls ;  but  the  smaller  ones  as  a  rule  have  none : 
"  the  backs  of  the  houses  might  serve  as  walls."  The  material  of 
which  the  houses  are  built  is  a  grey  dolerite,  impregnated  with 
glittering  particles  of  olivine.  "  The  stones  are  rarely  cemented, 
but  the  fine  and  for  the  most  part  large  squares  lie  one  upon 
another  as  if  they  were  fused  together."  "  Most  of  the  doors  of 
the  houses  which  lead  into  the  streets  or  open  fields  are  so  low,  that 
it  is  impossible  to  enter  them  without  stooping;  but  the  large 
buildings  and  the  ends  of  the  streets  have  lofty  gateways,  which  are 
always  tastefully  constructed,  and  often  decorated  with  sculptures 
and  Greek  inscriptions."  The  "  larger  gates  have  either  simple  or 
(what  are  most  common)  double  doors.  They  consist  of  a  slab  of 
dolerite.  There  are  certainly  no  doors  of  any  other  kind."  These 
stone  doors  turn  upon  pegs,  deeply  inserted  into  the  threshold  and 
lintel.  "  Even  a  man  can  only  shut  and  open  doors  of  this  kind, 
by  pressing  with  the  back  or  feet  against  the  wall,  and  pushing  the 
door  with  both  hands  "  (  Wetzstein,  pp.  50  sqq. ;  compare  with  this 
the  testimony  of  Buckingham,  Burckhardt,  Seetzen,  and  others,  in 
V,  Raumers  Palestine,  pp.  78  sqq.). 

Now,  even  if  the  existing  ruins  of  Hauran  date  for  the  most 
part  from  a  later  period,  and  are  probably  of  a  Nabataean  origin 
belonging  to  the  times  of  Trajan  and  the  Antonines,  yet  consider- 


300  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


fl 


ing  the  stability  of  the  East,  and  the  peculiar  nature  of  the  soil  of 
llauran,  they  give  a  tolerably  correct  idea  of  the  sixty  towns  of  the 
kingdom  of  Og  of  Bashan,  all  of  which  were  fortified  with  high 
walls,  gates,  and  bars,  or,  as  it  is  stated  in  1  Kings  iv.  13,  "  with 
walls  and  brazen  bars."  ^  The  brazen  bars  were  no  doubt,  like  the 
gates  themselves,  of  basalt  or  dolerite,  which  might  easily  be  mis- 
taken for  brass.  Besides  the  sixty  fortified  towns,  the  Israelites  took 
a  very  large  number  of  V'J^']  ^?.V?  "  towns  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  flat 
country, ^^  i.e.  unfortified  open  hamlets  and  villages  in  Bashan,  and  put 
them  under  the  ban,  like  the  towns  of  king  Silion  (vers.  6,  7 ;  cf. 
chap.  ii.  34,  35).  The  infinitive,  DinL'j  is  to  be  construed  as  a  gerund  ' 
(cf.  Ges.  §  131,  2  ;  Ewald,  §  280,  a.).  The  expression,  "  kingdom  of 
Og  in  Bashan,"  implies  that  the  kingdom  of  Og  was  not  limited  to 
the  land  of  Bashan,  but  included  the  northern  half  of  Gilead  as  well. 
In  vers.  8-11,  Moses  takes  a  retrospective  view  of  the  whole  of 
the  land  that  had  been  taken  on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan  ;  first 
of  all  (ver.  9)  in  its  whole  extent  from  the  Arnon  to  Hermon,  then 
(ver.  10)  in  its  separate  parts,  to  bring  out  in  all  its  grandeur  what 
the  Lord  had  done  for  Israel.  The  notices  of  the  different  names  fl 
of  Hermon  (ver.  9),  and  of  the  bed  of  king  Og  (ver.  11),  are  also 
subservient  to  this  end.  Hei^mon  is  the  southernmost  spur  of  Anti- 
libanus,  the  present  Jehel  es  Sheikh,  or  Jebel  et  Telj.  The  Hebrew 
name  is  not  connected  with  D^rij  anathema,  as  Hengstenherg  supposes 
(Diss.  pp.  197-8);  nor  was  it  first  given  by  the  Israelites  to  this  moun- 
tain, which  formed  part  of  the  northern  boundary  of  the  land  which 
they  had  taken ;  but  it  is  to  be  traced  to  an  Arabic  word  signifying 
prominens  montis  vertex,  and  was  a  name  which  had  long  been  current 
at  that  time,  for  which  the  Israelites  used  the  Hebrew  name  \^'''^ 
(Sion  =  l^^""^^,  the  high,  eminent :  chap.  iv.  48),  though  this  nama 
did  not  supplant  the  traditional  name  of  Hermon.  The  Sidonians 
called  it  Sirion,  a  modified  form  of  p'^}^  (1  Sam.  xvii.  5),  or  li"'1p 
(Jer.  xlvi.  4),  a  "  coat  of  mail ;"  the  Amorites  called  it  Senir,  pro- 
bably a  word  with  the  same  meaning.    In  Ps.  xxix.  6,  Sirion  is  used 

^  It  is  also  by  no  means  impossible,  that  many  of  the  oldest  dwellings  in  the 
ruined  towers  of  Hauran  date  from  a  time  anterior  to  the  conquest  of  the  land 
by  the  Israelites.  "  Simple,  built  of  heavy  blocks  of  basalt  roughly  hewn,  and 
as  hard  as  iron,  with  very  thick  walls,  very  strong  stone  gates  and  doors,  many 
of  which  were  about  eighteen  inches  thick,  and  were  formerly  fastened  with 
immense  bolts,  and  of  which  traces  still  remain  ;  such  houses  as  these  may  have 
been  the  work  of  the  old  giant  tribe  of  Rephaim,  whose  king,  Og,  was  defeated 
by  the  Israelites  3000  years  ago"  (C.  v.  Eaumer^  Pal.  p.  80,  after  Porters  Five 
Years  in  Damascus). 


CHAP.  III.  1-11.  301 

poetically  for  Hermon ;  and  Ezekiel  (xxvii.  4)  uses  Senir,  in  a 
mournful  dirge  over  Tyre,  as  synonymous  with  Lebanon ;  whilst 
Senir  is  mentioned  in  1  Chron.  v.  23,  and  Shenir  in  Cant.  iv.  8,  in 
connection  with  Hermon,  as  a  part  of  Antilibanus,  as  it  might  very 
naturally  happen  that  the- Amoritish  name  continued  attached  to  one 
or  other  of  the  peaks  of  the  mountain,  just  as  we  find  that  even 
Arabian  geographers,  such  as  Abulfeda  and  Maraszid,  call  that 
portion  of  Antilibanus  which  stretches  from  Baalbek  to  Emesa 
(Homs,  Heliopolis)  by  the  name  of  Sanir. — Ver.  10.  The  different 
portions  of  the  conquered  land  were  the  following :  "iK^^sn,  the  plain, 
i.e.  the  Amoritish  table-land,  stretching  from  the  Arnon  to  Hesh- 
bon,  and  in  a  north-easterly  direction  nearly  as  far  as  Rabbath- 
Ammon,  with  the  towns  of  Ileshbon,  Bezer,  Medeba,  Jahza,  and 
Dibon  (chap.  iv.  43 ;  Josh.  xiii.  9, 16,  17,  21,  xx.  8  ;  Jer.  xlviii.  21 
sqq.),  which  originally  belonged  to  the  Moabites,  and  is  therefore 
called  "  the  field  of  Moab"  in  Num.  xxi.  20  (see  p.  148).  "  The 
whole  of  Gileadj'  i.e.  the  mountainous  region  on  the  southern  and 
northern  sides  of  the  Jabbok,  which  was  divided  into  two  halves  by 
this  river.  The  southern  half,  which  reached  to  Heshbon,  belonged 
to  the  kingdom  of  Sihon  (Josh.  xii.  2),  and  was  assigned  by  Moses 
to  the  Reubenites  and  Gadites  (ver.  12) ;  whilst  the  northern  half, 
w^hich  is  called  "  the  rest  of  Gilead"  in  ver.  13,  the  modern  Jebel 
Ajlun,  extending  as  far  as  the  land  of  Bashan  (Hauran  and  Jaulan), 
belonged  to  the  kingdom  of  Og  (Josh.  xii.  5),  and  was  assigned  to 
the  Manassite  family  of  Machir  (ver.  15,  and  Josh.  xiii.  31 ;  of. 
V.  Raumer,  Pal.  pp.  229,  230).  "  And  all  Bashan  unto  Salcah  and 
Edrei."  All  Bashan  included  not  only  the  country  of  Hauran  (the 
plain  and  mountain),  but  unquestionably  also  the  district  of  Jedw 
and  Jaulan,  to  the  west  of  the  sea  of  Galilee  and  the  upper  Jordan, 
or  the  ancient  Gaulonitis  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  4,  6,  etc.),  as  the  kingdom 
of  Og  extended  to  the  coasts  of  Geshuri  and  Maachathi  (see  at 
ver.  14).  Og  had  not  conquered  the  whole  of  the  land  of  Hauran, 
however,  but  only  the  greater  part  of  it.  His  territory  extended 
eastwards  to  Salcah,  i.e.  the  present  Szalchat  or  Szarchad,  about  six 
hours  to  the  east  of  Bozrah,  south  of  Jebel  Hauran,  a  town  with 
800  houses,  and  a  castle  upon  a  basaltic  rock,  but  uninhabited  (cf. 
V.  Raumer,  Pal.  p.  255)  ;  and  northwards  to  Edrei,  i.e.  the  northern 
JUdrei  (see  at  Num.  xxi.  33),  a  considerable  ruin  on  the  north- 
west of  Bozrah,  three  or  four  English  miles  in  extent,  in  the  old 
buildings  of  which  there  are  200  families  living  at  present  (Turks, 
Druses,  and  Christians).     By  the  Arabian  geographers  (Abulfeda, 


302  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


Ihn  Batuta)  it  is  called  Sora,  by  modern  travellers  Adra  or  Edra 
(v,  BicJiter)y  or  Oezraa  (Seetzen),  or  Ezra  {Burclchardt),  and  Edhra 
{Robinson,  App.  155).  Consequently  nearly  the  whole  of  Jebel 
Hauran,  and  the  northern  portion  of  the  plain,  viz.  the  Leja,  were  Jl 
outside  the  kingdom  of  Og  and  the  land  of  Bashan,  of  which  the 
Israelites  took  possession,  although  Burchhardt  reckons  Ezra  as  part 
of  the  Leja. — Yer.  11.  Even  in  Abraham's  time,  the  giant  tribe  of 
Rephaim  was  living  in  Bashan  (Gen.  xiv.  5).  But  out  of  the  rem- 
nant of  these,  king  Og,  whom  the  Israelites  defeated  and  slew,  was 
the  only  one  left.  For  the  purpose  of  recalling  the  greatness  of  the 
grace  of  God  that  had  been  manifested  in  that  victory,  and  not 
merely  to  establish  the  credibility  of  the  statements  concerning  the 
size  of  Og  ("  just  as  things  belonging  to  an  age  that  has  long  passed 
away  are  shown  to  be  credible  by  their  remains,"  Spinoza,  etc.), 
Moses  points  to  the  iron  bed  of  this  king,  which  was  still  in  Rabbath- 
Ammon,  and  was  nine  cubits  long  and  four  broad,  "  after  the  cubit 
of  a  man,"  i.e,  the  ordinary  cubit  in  common  use  (see  the  analogous 
expression,  "  a  man's  pen,"  Isa.  viii.  1).  n^n^  for  ^\},,  synonymous 
with  ^^J}.  There  is  nothing  to  amaze  us  in  the  size  of  the  bed  or 
bedstead  given  here.  The  ordinary  Hebrew  cubit  was  only  a  foot 
and  a  half,  probably  only  eighteen  Dresden  inches  (see  my  Archdo- 
logie,  ii.  p.  126,  Anm.  4).  Now  a  bed  is  always  larger  than  the 
man  who  sleeps  in  it.  But  in  this  case  Clericus  fancies  that  Og 
"  intentionally  exceeded  the  necessary  size,  in  order  that  posterity 
might  be  led  to  draw  more  magnificent  conclusions  from  the  size  of 
the  bed,  as  to  the  stature  of  the  man  who  was  accustomed  to  sleep 
in  it."  He  also  refers  to  the  analogous  case  of  Alexander  the 
Great,  of  whom  Diod,  Sic,  (xvii.  95)  affirms,  that  whenever  he  was 
obliged  to  halt  on  his  march  to  India,  he  made  colossal  arrange- 
ments of  all  kinds,  causing,  among  other  things,  two  couches  to  be 
prepared  in  the  tents  for  every  foot-soldier,  each  five  cubits  long, 
and  two  stalls  for  every  horseman,  twice  as  large  as  the  ordinary 
size,  "  to  represent  a  camp  of  heroes,  and  leave  striking  memorials 
behind  for  the  inhabitants  of  the  land,  of  gigantic  men  and  their 
supernatural  strength."  With  a  similar  intention  Og  may  also  have 
left  behind  him  a  gigantic  bed  as  a  memorial  of  his  superhuman 
greatness,  on  the  occasion  of  some  expedition  of  his  against  the 
Ammonites  ;  and  this  bed  may  have  been  preserved  in  their  capital 
as  a  proof  of  the  greatness  of  their  foe.-^     Moses  might  then  refer 

^  "  It  will  often  be  found,  that  very  tall  people  are  disposed  to  make  them- 
Belves  appear  even  taller  than  they  actually  are"  {Hengstenberg,  Diss.  ii.  p.  201). 


CHAP.  III.  12-20.  303 

to  this  gigantic  bed  of  Og,  which  was  known  to  the  Israelites  ;  and 
there  is  no  reason  for  resorting  to  the  improbable  conjecture,  that 
the  Ammonites  had  taken  possession  of  a  bed  of  king  Og  upon  some 
expedition  against  the  Amorites,  and  had  carried  it  off  as  a  trophy 
into  their  capital.^  "  Rahhath  of  the  sons  of  Ammon,"  or  briefly 
JRahbaJi,  i.e.  the  great  (Josh.  xiii.  25 ;  2  Sam.  xi.  1),  was  the  capital 
of  the  Ammonites,  afterwards  called  Philadelphiaj  probably  from 
Ptolemgeus  Philadelphus ;  by  Polyhius^ 'Pa/S/SaTafiava ;  hjAbuIfeda, 
Amman,  which  is  the  name  still  given  to  the  uninhabited  ruins  on 
the  A^ahr  Amman,  i.e.  the  upper  Jabbok  (see  Burckhardt,  pp.  612 
sqq.,  and  v.  Baumer,  Pal.  p.  268). 

Vers.  12-20.  Keview  of  the  Distribution  of  the  con- 
quered Land. — The  land  which  the  Israelites  had  taken  belonging 
to  these  two  kingdoms  was  given  by  Moses  to  the  two  tribes  and  a 
half  for  their  possession,  viz.  the  southern  portion  from  Aroer  in 
the  Amon  valley  (see  at  Num.  xxxii.  34),  and  half  Gilead  (as  far 
as  the  Jabbok :  see  at  ver.  10)  with  its  towns,  which  are  enume- 
rated in  Josh.  xiii.  15-20  and  24-28,  to  the  Reubenites  and  Gadites; 
and  the  northern  half  of  Gilead,  with  the  whole  of  Bashan  (i.e.  all 
the  region  of  Argob  :  see  at  ver.  4,  and  Num.  xxxii.  33),  to  the  half- 
tribe  of  Manasseh.  jtt'Sri'PJPj  " as  for  all  Bashan,'  is  in  apposition 
to  "  all  the  region  of  Argoh,''  and  the  /  simply  serves  to  connect  it ; 
for  "  all  the  region  of  Argob  "  was  not  merely  one  portion  of  Bashan, 
but  was  identical  with  "  all  Bashan,"  so  far  as  it  belonged  to  the 
kingdom  of  Og  (see  at  ver.  4).  All  this  region  passed  for  a  land 
of  giants,  ^lijn,  to  be  called,  i.e.  to  be,  and  to  be  recognised  as 
being. — ^Ver.  14.  The  region  of  Argob,  or  the  country  of  Bashan, 
was  given  to  Jair  (see  Num.  xxxii.  41),  as  far 'as  the  territory  of  the 
Geshurites  and  Maachathites  (cf.  Josh.  xii.  5,  xiii.  11).  "  Unto" 
as  far  as,  is  to  be  understood  as  inclusive.     This  is  evident  from 

Moreover,  there  axe  still  giants  who  are  eight  feet  high  and  upwards.  "  Accord- 
ing to  the  N.  Preuss.  Zeit.  of  1857,  there  came  a  man  to  Berlin  8  feet  4  inches 
high,  and  possibly  still  growing,  as  he  was  only  twenty  years  old  ;  and  he  was 
said  to  have  a  great-uncle  who  was  nine  inches  taller"  (Schultz). 

^  There  is  still  less  probability  in  the  conjecture  of  /.  D.  MicJiaelis,  Vater, 
Winer^  and  others,  that  Og's  iron  bed  was  a  sarcophagus  of  basalt,  such  as  are 
still  frequently  met  with  in  those  regions,  as  much  as  9  feet  long  and  8^  feet 
broad,  or  even  as  much  as  12  feet  long  and  6  feet  in  breadth  and  height  (vid. 
Burckhardt,  pp.  220,  246  ;  RoUnson,  iii.  p.  385 ;  Seetzen,  i.  pp.  355,  360)  ;  and 
the  still  further  assumption,  that  the  corpse  of  the  fallen  king  was  taken  to 
Kabbah,  and  there  interred  in  a  royal  way,  is  altogether  improbable. 


304  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


the  statement  in  Josh.  xiii.  13 :  "  The  cldldren  of  Israel  expelled 
not  the  Geshurites  nor  the  MaachatJdtes ;  but  the  Geshurites  and  the 
Maachathites  dwell  among  the  Israelites  until  this  day"    Consequently  ll 
Moses  allotted  the  territory  of  these  two  tribes  to  the  Manassites, 
because  it   formed  part  of  the  kingdom  of  Og.     "  Geshuri  and     _ 
Maachathi "  are  the  inhabitants  of  Geshur  and  Maachah,  two  pro-  |l 
vinces  which  formed  small  independent  kingdoms  even  in  David's 
time  (2  Sam.  iii.  3,  xiii.  37,  and  x.  6).     Geshur  bordered  on  Aram.   __ 
The  Geshurites  and  Aramaeans  afterwards  took  from  the  Israelites  fll 
the  JazV-towns  and  Kenath,  with  their  daughter  towns  (1  Chron.  ii. 
23).     In  David's  time  Geshur  had  a  king  Thalmai,  whose  daughter 
David  married.     This  daughter  was  the  mother  of  Absalom ;  and 
it  was  in  Geshur  that  Absalom  lived  for  a  time  in  exile  (2  Sam.  iii. 
3,  xiii.  37,  xiv.  23,  xv.  8).     The  exact  situation  of  Geshur  has  not 
yet  been  determined.     It  was  certainly  somewhere  near  Hermon, 
on  the  eastern  side  of  the  upper  Jordan,  and  by  a  bridge  over  Ml 
the  Jordan,  as  Geshur  signifies  bridge  in  all  the  Semitic  dialects.  ^" 
Maachahj  which  is  referred  to  in  1  Chron.  xix.  6  as  a  kingdom 
under  the  name  of  Aram-Maachah  (Eng.  V.  Syria-Maachah),  is  ■I 
probably  to  be  sought  for  to  the  north-east  of  Geshur,     According 
to  the  Onomast.  (s.  v,  Ma'xaOi)^  it  was  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the 
Hermon.    "  And  he  called  them  (the  towns  of  the  region  of  Argob) 
after  his  own  name ;  Bashan  (sc.  he  called)  Havvoth  Jair  unto  this 
day"^^  (cf.  Num.  xxxii.  41).     The  word  H^n  (^Havvoth),  which  only 
occurs  in  connection  with  the  JaiV-towns,  does  not  mean  towns  or 
camps  of  a  particular  kind,  viz.  tent  villages,  as  some  suppose,  but 
is  the  plural  of  njn,  life  (Leben,  a  common  German  termination, 
e.g.  Eisleben),  for  which  afterwards  the  word  njn  was  used  (comp. 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  13  with  1  Chron.  xi.  15).     It  applies  to  any  kind  of  ^ 
dwelling-place,  being  used  in  the  passages  just  mentioned  to  denote  " 
even  a  w^arlike  encampment.    The  Jairs-lives  (Jairsleben)  were  not 
a  particular  class  of  towns,  therefore,  in  the  district  of  Argob,  but 
Jair  gave  this  collective  name  to  all  the  sixty  fortified  towns,  as  is 
perfectly  evident  from  the  verse  before  us  when  compared  with  ver. 
5  and  Num.  xxxii.  41,  and  expressly  confirmed  by  Josh.  xiii.  30  and 
1  Kings  iv.  13,  where  the  sixty  fortified  towns  of  the  district  of 
Argob  are  called  Havvoth  Jair. — The  statement  in  1  Chron.  ii.  22, 
23,  that  "  Jair  had  twenty-three  towns  in  Gilead  (which  is  used  here 
as  in  chap,  xxxiv.  1,  Josh.  xxii.  9,  xiii.  15,  Judg.  v.  17,  xx.  1,  to  de- 
note the  whole  of  Palestine  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan),  and  Geshur 
and  Aram  took  the  Havvoth  Jair  from  them^  (and)  Kenath  and  its 


CHAP.  III.  12-20.  ,  305 

daugliters,  sixty  towns  (sc.  in  all)/'  is  by  no  means  at  variance  with 
this,  but,  on  the  contrary,  in  the  most  perfect  harmony  with  it.  For 
it  is  evident  from  this  passage,  that  the  twenty-three  Havvoth  Jair^ 
with  Kenath  and  its  daughters,  formed  sixty  towns  altogether.  The 
distinction  between  the  twenty-three  Havvoth  Jair  and  the  other 
thirty-seven  towns,  viz.  Kenath  and  its  daughters,  is  to  be  explained 
from  the  simple  fact  that,  according  to  Num.  xxxii.  42,  Nobah,  no 
doubt  a  family  of  sons  of  Machir  related  to  Jair,  conquered  Kenath 
and  its  daughters,  and  called  the  conquered  towns  by  his  name, 
namely,  when  they  had  been  allotted  to  him  by  Moses.  Conse- 
quently Bashan,  or  the  region  of  Argob,  with  its  sixty  fortified 
tow^ns,  was  divided  between  two  of  the  leading  families  of  Machir 
the  Manassite,  viz.  the  families  of  Jair  and  Nobah,  each  family 
receiving  the  districts  which  it  had  conquered,  together  with  their 
towns;  namely,  the  family  of  Nobah,  Kenath  and  its  daughter 
towns,  or  the  eastern  portion  of  Bashan ;  and  the  family  of  Jair, 
twenty-three  towns  in  the  west,  which  are  called  Havvoth  Jair  in 
1  Chron.  ii.  23,  in  harmony  with  Num.  xxxii.  41,  where  Jair  is  said 
to  have  given  this  name  to  the  towns  which  were  conquered  by  him. 
In  the  address  before  us,  however,  in  which  Moses  had  no  intention 
to  enter  into  historical  details,  all  the  (sixty)  towns  of  the  whole 
district  of  Argob,  or  the  whole  of  Bashan,  are  comprehended  under 
the  name  of  Havvoth  Jair,  probably  because  Nobah  was  a  subordi- 
nate branch  of  the  family  of  Jair,  and  the  towns  conquered  by  him 
were  under  the  supremacy  of  Jair.  The  expression  "unto  this 
day  "  certainly  does  not  point  to  a  later  period  than  the  Mosaic  age. 
This  definition  of  time  is  simply  a  relative  one.  It  does  not  neces- 
sarily presuppose  a  very  long  duration,  and  here  it  merely  serves  to 
bring  out  the  marvellous  change  which  was  due  to  the  divine  grace, 
viz.  that  the  sixty  fortified  towns  of  the  giant  king  Og  of  Bashan 
had  now  become  Jair's  lives.^ — Ver.  15.  Machir  received  Gilead 
(see  Num.  xxxii.  40). — In  vers.  16  and  17  the  possession  of  the 
tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad  is  described  more  fully  according  to  its 
boundaries.  They  received  the  land  of  Gilead  (to  the  south  of  the 
Jabbok)  as  far  as  the  brook  Arnon,  the  middle  of  the  valley  and 
its  territory,     ^n^n  Tjin  is  a  more  precise  definition  of  p")fc<  7nj,  ex- 

*  The  conquest  of  these  towns,  in  fact,  does  not  seem  to  have  been  of  long 
duration,  and  the  possession  of  them  by  the  Israelites  was  a  very  disputed  one 
(cf.  1  Chron.  ii.  22,  23).  In  the  time  of  the  judges  we  find  thirty  in  the  pos- 
session of  the  judge  Jair  (Judg.  x.  4),  which  caused  the  old  name  Havvoth  Jaii 
to  be  revived. 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  U 


306  .  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

pressive  of  the  fact  that  the  territory  of  these  tribes  was  not  to  reach 
merely  to  the  northern  edge  of  the  Arnon  valley,  but  into  the 
middle  of  it,  viz.  to  the  river  Arnon,  which  flowed  through  the 
middle  of  the  valley ;  and  7^^^^  (and  the  border)  is  an  explanatory- 
apposition  to  what  goes  before,  as  in  Num.  xxxiv.  6,  signifying, 
^^viz,  the  border  of  the  Arnon  valley  as  far  as  the  river J^  On  the  east, 
"  even  unto  Jabhok  the  brook,  the  (western)  border  of  the  Ammonites  " 
(i,e.  as  far  as  the  upper  Jabbok,  the  Nahr  Amman :  see  at  Num. 
xxi.  24) ;  and  on  the  west  "  the  Arabah  (the  Ghor :  see  chap.  I.  1) 
and  the  Jordan  with  territory "  (i.e.  with  its  eastern  bank),  ''from 
Chinnereth "  (ix.  the  town  from  which  the  Sea  of  Galilee  received 
the  name  of  Sea  of  Chinnereth:  Num.  xxxiv.  11;  see  at  Josh, 
xix.  35)  "  to  the  sea  of  the  Arabah,  the  Salt  Sea  under  the  slopes  of 
Pisgah  (see  at  Num.  xxi.  15  and  xxvii.  12)  eastward  "  (i.e.  merely 
the  eastern  side  of  the  Arabah  and  Jordan). — In  vers.  18-20  Moses 
reminds  them  of  the  conditions  upon  which  he  had  given  the  two 
tribes  and  a  half  the  land  referred  to  for  their  inheritance  (cf. 
Num.  xxxii.  20-32). 

Vers.  21-29.  Nomination  of  Joshua  as  his  Successor. — 
This  reminiscence  also  recalls  the  goodness  of  God  in  the  appoint- 
ment of  Joshua  (Num.  xxvii.  12  sqq.),  which  took  place  "  at  that 
time^^  i.e.  after  the  conquest  of  the  land  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan. 
In  accordance  with  the  object  of  his  address,  which  was  to  hold  up  to 
view  what  the  Lord  had  done  for  Israel,  he  here  relates  how,  at  the 
very  outset,  he  pointed  Joshua  to  the  things  which  he  had  seen  with 
his  eyes  (rij<in  ^''yv,  thine  eyes  were  seeing ;  cf .  JEwald,  §  335,  b.), 
namely,  to  the  defeat  of  the  two  kings  of  the  Amorites,  in  which 
the  pledge  was  contained,  that  the  faithful  covenant  God  would 
complete  the  work  He  had  begun,  and  would  do  the  same  to  all 
kingdoms  whither  Joshua  would  go  over  (i.e.  across  the  Jordan). — 
Ver.  22.  For  this  reason  they  were  not  to  be  afraid ;  for  Jehovah 
Himself  would  fight  for  them.  "  He  "  is  emphatic,  and  adds  force 
to  the  subject. — Vers.  23  sqq.  Moses  then  describes  how,  notwith- 
standing his  prayer,  the  Lord  had  refused  him  permission  to  cross 
over  into  Canaan  and  see  the  glorious  land.  This  prayer  is  not 
mentioned  in  the  historical  account  given  in  the  fourth  book ;  but 
it  must  have  preceded  the  prayer  for  the  appointment  of  a  shepherd 
over  the  congregation  in  Num.  xxvii.  16,  as  the  Lord  directs  him 
in  His  reply  (ver.  28)  to  appoint  Joshua  as  the  leader  of  the  people. 
In  his  prayer,  Moses  appealed  to  the  manifestations  of  divine  grace 


CHAP.  III.  21-29.  ,  307 

which  he  had  already  received.  As  the  Lord  had  already  begun  to 
show  him  His  greatness  and  His  mighty  hand,  so  might  He  also  show 
him  the  completion  of  His  work.  The  expression,  "  begun  to  show 
Thy  greatness/'  relates  not  so  much  to  the  mighty  acts  of  the  Lord 
in  Egypt  and  at  the  Ked  Sea  (as  in  Ex.  xxxii.  11,  12,  and  Num. 
xiv.  13  sqq.),  as  to  the  manifestation  of  the  divine  omnipotence  in 
the  defeat  of  the  Amorites,  by  which  the  Lord  had  begun  to  bring 
His  people  into  the  possession  of  the  promised  land,  and  had  made 
Himself  known  as  God,  to  whom  there  was  no  equal  in  heaven  or 
on  earth.  "^K'^?  before  ?^  ""P  (ver.  24)  is  an  explanatory  and  causal  re- 
lative :  because  (quod,  quia),  or  for.  "  For  ivhat  God  is  there  in  heaven 
and  on  earth,'^  etc.  These  words  recall  Ex.  xv.  11,  and  are  echoed 
in  many  of  the  Psalms — in  Ps.  Ixxxvi.  8  almost  verbatim.  The  con- 
trast drawn  between  Jehovah  and  other  gods  does  not  involve  the 
reality  of  the  heathen  deities,  but  simply  presupposes  a  belief  in  the 
existence  of  other  gods,  without  deciding  as  to  the  truth  of  that 
belief.  nni33,  manifestations  of  nn^^a,  mighty  deeds. — Ver.  25.  "  / 
pray  Thee,  let  me  go  overP  WTinnvtJt,  a  form  of  desire,  used  as  a 
petition,  as  in  chap.  ii.  27,  Num.  xxi.  22,  etc.  "  That  goodly  moun- 
tain "  is  not  one  particular  portion  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  such 
as  the  mountains  of  Judah,  or  the  temple  mountain  (according  to 
Ex.  XV.  17),  but  the  whole  of  Canaan  regarded  as  a  mountainous 
country,  Lebanon  being  specially  mentioned  as  the  boundary  wall 
towards  the  north.  As  Moses  stood  on  the  lower  level  of  the 
Arabah,  the  promised  land  presented  itself  not  only  to  his  eyes,  but 
also  to  his  soul,  as  a  long  mountain  range ;  and  that  not  merely  as 
suggestive  of  the  lower  contrast,  that  "  whereas  the  plains  in  the 
East  are  for  the  most  part  sterile,  on  account  of  the  want  of  springs 
or  rain,  the  mountainous  regions,  which  are  well  watered  by  springs 
and  streams,  are  very  fertile  and  pleasant "  {RosenmuUer),  but  also 
on  a  much  higher  ground,  viz.  as  a  high  and  lofty  land,  which  would 
stand  by  the  side  of  Horeb,  "where  he  had  spent  the  best  and 
holiest  days  of  his  life,  and  where  he  had  seen  the  commencement 
of  the  covenant  between  God  and  His  people"  (Schultz). — Ver.  26. 
But  the  Lord  would  not  grant  his  request.  "  Let  it  suffice  thee" 
(satis  sit  tibi,  as  in  chap.  i.  6),  substantially  equivalent  to  2  Cor. 
xii.  8,  "  My  grace  is  sufficient  for  thee"  (Schultz).  3  "13%  to  speak 
about  a  thing  (as  in  chap.  vi.  7,  xi.  19,  etc.). — Ver.  27  is  a  rhetori- 
cal paraphrase  of  Num.  xxvii.  12,  where  the  mountains  of  Abarim 
are  mentioned  in  the  place  of  Pisgah,  which  was  the  northern  por- 
tion of  Abarim.      (On  ver.  28,  cf.  chap.  i.  38  and  Num.  xxvii.  23.) 


308  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

— Ver.  29.  "  So  we  abode  in  the  valley  over  against  Beth-Peor"  i.e. 
in  the  Arboth  Moab  (Num.  xxii.  1),  sc.  where  vre  still  are.  The 
prot.  ^pp}  is  used,  because  Moses  fixes  his  eye  upon  the  past,  and 
looks  back  upon  the  events  already  described  in  Num.  xxviii.- 
xxxiv.  as  having  taken  place  there.  On  Beth-Peor,  see  at  Num. 
xxiii.  28. 


EXHORTATION  TO  A  FAITHFUL  OBSERVANCE  OF  THE  LAW.- 
CHAP.  IV.  1-40. 

With  the  word  nnjn,  "  and  noWj^  Moses  passes  from  a  contem- 
plation of  what  the  Lord  had  done  for  Israel,  to  an  exhortation  to 
keep  the  law  of  the  Lord.  The  divine  manifestations  of  grace  laid 
Israel  under  the  obligation  to  a  conscientious  observance  of  the 
law,  that  they  might  continue  to  enjoy  the  blessings  of  the  cove- 
nant. The  exhortation  commences  with  the  appeal,  to  hear  and 
keep  the  commandments  and  rights  of  the  Lord,  without  adding  to 
them  or  taking  from  them ;  for  not  only  were  life  and  death  sus- 
pended upon  their  observance,  but  it  was  in  this  that  the  wisdom 
and  greatness  of  Israel  before  all  the  nations  consisted  (vers.  1-8). 
It  then  proceeds  to  a  warning,  not  to  forget  the  events  at  Horeb 
(vers.  9-14)  and  so  fall  into  idolatry,  the  worship  of  images  or  idol 
deities  (vers.  15—24) ;  and  it  closes  with  a  threat  of  dispersion 
among  the  heathen  as  the  punishment  of  apostasy,  and  with  a  pro- 
mise of  restoration  as  the  consequence  of  repentance  and  sincere 
conversion  (vers.  25-31),  and  also  with  a  reason  for  this  threat 
and  promise  drawn  from  the  history  of  the  immediate  past  (vers. 
32—34),  for  the  purpose  of  fortifying  the  nation  in  its  fidelity  to 
its  God,  the  sole  author  of  its  salvation  (vers.  35-40). 

Vers.  1-8.  The  Israelites  were  to  hearken  to  the  laws  and 
rights  which  Moses  taught  to  do  (that  they  were  to  do),  that  they 
might  live  and  attain  to  the  possession  of  the  land  which  the  Lord 
would  give  them.  "Hearkening"  involves  laying  to  heart  and 
observing.  The  words  "  statutes  and  judgments  "  (as  in  Lev.  xix. 
37)  denote  the  whole  of  the  law  of  the  covenant  in  its  two  leading 
features.  Q''ipn,  statutes,  includes  the  moral  commandments  and 
statutory  covenant  laws,  for  which  pn  and  njjn  are  mostly  used  in 
the  earlier  books,  that  is  to  say,  all  that  the  people  were  bound  to 
observe ;  ta'^pSK^,  rights,  all  that  was  due  to  them,  whether  in  rela- 
tion to  God  or  to  their  fellow-men  (cf.  chap.  xxvi.  17).  Sometimes 
•^l?^-?  the  commandment,  is  connected  with  it,  either  placed  first  in 


CHAP.  rv.  1-8.  309 

the  singular,  as  a  general  comprehensive  notion  (chap.  v.  28,  vi. 
1,  vii.  11),  or  in  the  plural  (chap.  viii.  11,  xi.  1,  xxx.  16)  ;  or  ^"^V^}, 
the  testimoniesy  the  commandments  as  a  manifestation  of  the  will 
of  God  (ver.  45,  vi.  17,  20). — Life  itself  depended  upon  the  ful- 
filment, or  long  life  in  the  promised  land  (Ex.  xx.  12),  as  Moses 
repeatedly  impressed  upon  them  (cf.  ver.  40,  chap.  v.  30,  vi.  2,  viii. 

1,  xi.  21,  xvi.  20,  XXV.  15,  xxx.  6,  15  sqq.,  xxxii.  47).  DJJ^^,  for 
DriKh^  (as  in  ver.  22,  Josh.  i.  16;  cf.  Ges.  §  44,  2,  Anm.  2).'— Yer. 

2.  The  observance  of  the  law,  however,  required  that  it  should  be 
kept  as  it  was  given,  that  nothing  should  be  added  to  it  or  taken 
from  it,  but  that  men  should  submit  to  it  as  to  the  inviolable  word 
of  God.  Not  by  omissions  only,  but  by  additions  also,  was  the  com- 
mandment weakened,  and  the  word  of  God  turned  into  ordinances 
of  men,  as  Pharisaism  sufiiciently  proved.  This  precept  is  re- 
peated in  chap.  xiii.  1 ;  it  is  then  revived  by  the  prophets  (Jer. 
xxvi.  2 ;  Prov.  xxx.  6),  and  enforced  again  at  the  close  of  the 
w-hole  revelation  (Rev.  xxii.  18,  19).  In  the  same  sense  Christ  also 
said  that  He  had  not  come  to  destroy  the  law  or  the  prophets,  but 
to  fulfil  (Matt.  V.  17)  ;  and  the  old  covenant  was  not  abrogated,  but 
only  glorified  and  perfected,  by  the  new. — Vei-s.  3,  4.  The  Israelites 
had  just  experienced  how  a  faithful  observance  of  the  law  gave  life, 
in  what  the  Lord  had  done  on  account  of  Baal-Peor,  when  He  de- 
stroyed those  who  worshipped  this  idol  (Num.  xxv.  3,  9),  whereas 
the  faithful  followers  of  the  Lord  still  remained  alive.  3  p?'^,  to 
cleave  to  any  one,  to  hold  fast  to  him.  This  example  was  adduced 
by  Moses,  because  the  congregation  had  passed  through  all  this 
only  a  very  short  time  before ;  and  the  results  of  faithfulness  towards 
the  Lord  on  the  one  hand,  and  of  the  unfaithfulness  of  apostasy 
from  Him  on  the  other,  had  been  made  thoroughly  apparent  to  it. 
"  Your  eyes  the  seeing"  as  in  chap.  iii.  21. — Vers.  5,  6.  But  the 
laws  which  Moses  taught  were  commandments  of  the  Lord.  Keep- 
ing and  doing  them  were  to  be  the  wisdom  and  understanding  of 
Israel  in  the  eyes  of  the  nations,  who,  w^hen  they  heard  all  these 
laws,  would  say,  "  Certainly  (P*i,  only,  no  other  than)  a  wise  and 
understanding  people  is  this  great  nation^  History  has  confirmed 
this.  Not  only  did  the  wisdom  of  a  Solomon  astonish  the  queen  of 
Sheba  (1  Kings  x.  4  sqq.),  but  the  divine  truth  which  Israel  pos- 
sessed in  the  law  of  Moses  attracted  all  the  more  earnest  minds  of 
the  heathen  world  to  seek  the  satisfaction  of  the  inmost  necessities 
of  their  heart  and  the  salvation  of  their  souls  in  Israel's  knowledge 
of  God,  when,  after  a  short  period  of  bloom,  the  inward  self-dis- 


310  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

solution  of  the  heathen  religions  had  set  in ;  and  at  last,  in  Chris- 
tianity, it  has  brought  one  heathen  nation  after  another  to  the 
knowledge  of  the  true  God,  and  to  eternal  salvation,  notwith- 
standing the  fact  that  the  divine  truth  was  and  still  is  regarded  as 
folly  by  the  proud  philosophers  and  self-righteous  Epicureans  and 
Stoics  of  ancient  and  modern  times. — Vers.  7,  8.  This  mighty  and 
attractive  force  of  the  wisdom  of  Israel  consisted  in  the  fact,  that 
in  Jehovah  they  possessed  a  God  who  was  at  hand  with  His  help 
when  they  called  upon  Him  (cf.  chap,  xxxiii.  29  ;  Ps.  xxxiv.  19, 
cxlv.  18 ;  1  Kings  ii.  7),  as  none  of  the  gods  of  the  other  nations 
had  ever  been ;  and  that  in  the  law  of  God  they  possessed  such 
statutes  and  rights  as  the  heathen  never  had.  True  right  has  its 
roots  in  God ;  and  with  the  obscuration  of  the  knowledge  of  God, 
law  and  right,  with  their  divinely  established  foundations,  are  also 
shaken  and  obscured  (cf.  Rom.  i.  26-32). 

Vers.  9-14.  Israel  was  therefore  not  to  forget  the  things  which 
it  had  seen  at  Horeb  with  its  own  eyes. — Ver.  9.  "  Only  beware  and 
take  care  of  thyself. ^^  To  "  keep  the  soul,"  i.e.  to  take  care  of  the 
soul  as  the  seat  of  life,  to  defend  one's  life  from  danger  and  injury 
(Prov.  xiii.  3,  xix.  16).  "  That  thou  do  not  forget  Dni-qn-nx  (the 
facts  described  in  Ex.  xix.-xxiv.),  and  that  they  do  not  depart  from 
thy  heart  all  the  days  of  thy  life"  i.e.  are  not  forgotten  as  long  as 
thou  livest,  "  and  thou  makest  them  known  to  thy  children  and  thy 
children's  children.^'  These  acts  of  God  formed  the  foundation  of  the 
true  religion,  the  real  basis  of  the  covenant  legislation,  and  the  firm 
guarantee  of  the  objective  truth  and  divinity  of  all  the  laws  and 
ordinances  w^hich  Moses  gave  to  the  people.  And  it  was  this  which 
constituted  the  essential  distinction  between  the  religion  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  all  heathen  religions,  whose  founders,  it  is  true, 
professed  to  derive  their  doctrines  and  statutes  from  divine  inspira- 
tion, but  without  giving  any  practical  guarantee  that  their  origin 
was  truly  divine. — Vers.  10-12.  In  the  words,  "  The  day  (D^*'"!),  ad- 
verbial accusative)  "  that  thou  stoodest  before  Jehovah  thy  God  at 
Horeb"  etc.,  Moses  reminds  the  people  of  the  leading  features  of 
those  grand  events  :  first  of  all  of  the  fact  that  God  directed  him  to 
gather  the  people  together,  that  He  might  make  known  His  words 
to  them  (Ex.  xix.  9  sqq.),  that  they  were  to  learn  to  fear  Him 
all  their  life  long,  and  to  teach  their  children  also  (p^T.,  inf.,  like 
n«ib^,  chap.  i.  27)  ;  and  secondly  (ver.  11),  that  they  came  near  to 
the  mountain  which  burned  in  fire  (cf.  Ex.  xix.  17  sqq.).  The  ex- 
pression, burning  in  fire  "  even  to  the  heart  of  heaven^^  i.e.  quite  into 


CHAP.  IV.  15-24.  311 

the  sky,  is  a  rhetorical  description  of  the  awful  majesty  of  the  pillar 
of  fire,  in  which  the  glory  of  the  Lord  appeared  upon  Sinai,  intended 
to  impress  deeply  upon  the  minds  of  the  people  the  remembrance 
of  this  manifestation  of  God.  And  the  expression,  "  darkness,  clouds^ 
and  thick  darkness,^  which  is  equivalent  to  the  smoking  of  the  great 
mountain  (Ex.  xix.  18),  is  employed  with  the  same  object.  And 
lastly  (vers.  12,  13),  he  reminds  them  that  the  Lord  spoke  out  of 
the  midst  of  the  fire,  and  adds  this  important  remark,  to  prepare 
the  way  for  what  is  to  follow,  "  Ye  heard  the  sound  of  the  words,  hit 
ye  did  not  see  a  shape,^  which  not  only  agrees  most  fully  with  Ex. 
xxiv.,  where  it  is  stated  that  the  sight  of  the  glory  of  Jehovah  upon 
the  mountain  appeared  to  the  people  as  they  stood  at  the  foot  of  the 
mountain  "  like  devouring  fire"  (ver.  17),  and  that  even  the  elders 
who  "  saw  God"  upon  the  mountain  at  the  conclusion  of  the  cove- 
nant saw  no  form  of  God  (ver.  11),  but  also  with  Ex.  xxxiii.  20,  23, 
according  to  which  no  man  can  see  the  face  (I^^??)  of  God.  Even 
the  simiUtude  (temunah)  of  Jehovah,  which  Moses  saw  when  the 
Lord  spoke  to  him  mouth  to  mouth  (Num.  xii.  8),  was  not  the  form 
of  the  essential  being  of  God  which  was  visible  to  his  bodily  eyes, 
but  simply  a  manifestation  of  the  glory  of  God  answering  to  his 
own  intuition  and  perceptive  faculty,  which  is  not  to  be  regarded 
as  a  form  of  God  which  was  an  adequate  representation  of  the 
divine  nature.  The  true  God  has  no  such  form  which  is  visible  to 
the  human  eye. — ^Ver.  13.  The  Israelites,  therefore,  could  not  see 
a  form  of  God,  but  could  only  hear  the  voice  of  His  words,  when 
the  Lord  proclaimed  His  covenant  to  them,  and  gave  utterance  to 
the  ten  words,  which  He  afterwards  gave  to  Moses  written  upon 
two  tables  of  stone  (Ex.  xx.  1-14  (17),  and  xxxi.  18,  compared  with 
chap.  xxiv.  12).  On  the  "  tables  of  stone,"  see  at  Ex.  xxxiv.  1. — 
Ver.  14.  When  the  Lord  Himself  had  made  known  to  the  people 
in  the  ten  words  the  covenant  which  He  commanded  them  to  do. 
He  directed  Moses  to  teach  them  laws  and  rights  which  they  were 
to  observe  in  Canaan,  viz.  the  rights  and  statutes  of  the  Sinaitic 
legislation,  from  Ex.  xxi.  onwards. 

Vers.  15-24.  As  the  Israelites  had  seen  no  shape  of  God  at 
Horeb,  they  were  to  beware  for  their  souls'  sake  (for  their  lives)  of 
acting  corruptly,  and  making  to  themselves  any  kind  of  image  of 
Jehovah  their  God,  namely,  as  the  context  shows,  to  worship  God 
in  it.  (On  pesel,  see  at  Ex.  xx.  4.)  The  words  which  follow,  viz. 
"  a  form  of  any  kind  of  sculpture"  and  "  a  representation  of  male  or 
female^  (for  tabnithj  see  at  Ex.  xxv.  9),  are  in  apposition  to  "  graven 


312  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

image,"  and  serve  to  explain  and  emphasize  the  prohibition. — Vers. 
17,  18.  They  were  also  not  to  make  an  image  of  any  kind  of  beast; 
a  caution  against  imitating  the  animal  worship  of  Egypt. — Ver.  19. 
They  were  not  to  allow  themselves  to  be  torn  away  (fT^^)  to  worship 
the  stars  of  heaven,  namely,  by  the  seductive  influence  exerted  upon 
the  senses  by  the  sight  of  the  heavenly  bodies  as  they  shone  in  their 
glorious  splendour.  The  reason  for  this  prohibition  is  given  in  the 
relative  clause,  "  which  Jehovah  thy  God  hath  allotted  to  all  nations 
under  the  whole  heaven^  The  thought  is  not,  "  God  has  given  the 
heathen  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars  for  service,  i.e.  to  serve  them  with 
their  light,"  as  Onkelos,  the  Habbins,  Jerome,  and  others,  suppose, 
but  He  has  allotted  them  to  them  for  worship,  i.e.  permitted  them 
to  choose  them  as  the  objects  of  their  worship,  which  is  the  view 
adopted  by  Justin  Martyr,  Clemens  Alex.,  and  others.  According 
to  the  scriptural  view,  even  the  idolatry  of  the  heathen  existed  by 
divine  permission  and  arrangement.  God  gave  up  the  heathen 
to  idolatry  and  shameful  lusts,  because,  although  they  knew  Him 
from  His  works,  they  did.  not  praise  Him  as  God  (Rom.  i.  21,  24, 
26). — ^Ver.  20.  The  Israelites  were  not  to  imitate  the  heathen  in 
this  respect,  because  Jehovah,  who  brought  them  out  of  the  iron 
furnace  of  Egypt,  had  taken  them  (njpp)  to  Himself,  i.e.  had  drawn 
them  out  or  separated  them  from  the  rest  of  the  nations,  to  be  a 
people  of  inheritance.  They  were  therefore  not  to  seek  God  and 
pray  to  Him  in  any  kind  of  creature,  but  to  worship  Him  without 
image  and  form,  in  a  manner  corresponding  to  His  own  nature,  S 
which  had  been  manifested  in  no  form,  and  therefore  could  not  be  9 
imitated.  ^nB  "i^S,  an  iron  furnace,  or  furnace  for  smelting  iron,  » 
is  a  significant  figure  descriptive  of  the  terrible  sufferings  endured 
by  Israel  in  Egypt,  n^m  Dy  (a  people  of  inheritance)  is  synony- 
mous with  njJD  d;;  (a  special  people,  chap.  vii.  6  :  see  at  Ex.  xix. 
5,  "a  peculiar  treasure").  "  This  day ;"  as  in  chap.  ii.  30. — Vers. 
21  sqq.  The  bringing  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt  reminds  Moses  of  the 
end,  viz.  Canaan,  and  leads  him  to  mention  again  how  the  Lord 
had  refused  him  permission  to  enter  into  this  good  land ;  and  to 
this  he  adds  the  renewed  warning  not  to  forget  the  covenant  or 
make  any  image  of  God,  since  Jehovah,  as  a  jealous  God,  would 
never  tolerate  this.  The  swearing  attributed  to  God  in  ver.  21  is 
neither  mentioned  in  Num.  xx.  nor  at  the  announcement  of  Moses' 
death  in  Num.  xxvii.  12  sqq. ;  but  it  is  not  to  be  called  in  question 
on  that  account,  as  Knohel  supposes.  It  is  perfectly  obvious  from 
chap.  iii.  23  sqq.  that  all  the  details  are  not  given  in  the  historical 


CHAP   IV.  25-31.  313 

account  of  the  event  referred  to.  ?'2  rii^Dn  702,  "  image  of  a  form 
of  all  that  Jehovah  has  commanded^^  sc.  not  to  be  made  (vers.  16-18). 
"  A  consuming  fire"  (ver.  24)  :  this  epithet  is  applied  to  God  with 
special  reference  to  the  manifestation  of  His  glory  in  burning  fire 
(Ex.  xxiv.  17).  On  the  symbolical  meaning  of  this  mode  of  revela- 
tion, see  at  Ex.  iii.  2  (vol.  i.  pp.  438-9).  ''A  jealous  God :"  see  at 
Ex.  XX.  5. 

Yers.  25-31.  To  give  emphasis  to  this  warning,  Moses  holds 
up  the  future  dispersion  of  the  nation  among  the  heathen  as  the 
punishment  of  apostasy  from  the  Lord. — ^Vers.  25,  26.  If  the 
Israelites  should  beget  children  and  children's  children,  and  grow 
old  in  the  land,  and  then  should  make  images  of  God,  and  do  that 
which  was  displeasing  to  God  to  provoke  Him  ;  in  that  case  Moses 
called  upon  heaven  and  earth  as  witnesses  against  them,  that  they 
should  be  quickly  destroyed  out  of  the  land.  "  Growing  old  in  the 
land  "  involved  forgetf ulness  of  the  former  manifestations  of  grace 
on  the  part  of  the  Lord,  but  not  necessarily  becoming  voluptuous 
through  the  enjoyment  of  the  riches  of  the  land,  although  this 
might  also  lead  to  forgetfulness  of  God  and  the  manifestations  of 
His  grace  (cf.  chap.  vi.  10  sqq.,  xxxii.  15).  The  apodosis  com- 
mences with  ver.  2Q.  T'Vn,  with  3  and  the  accusative,  to  take  or 
summon  as  a  witness  against  a  person.  Heaven  and  earth  do  not 
stand  here  for  the  rational  beings  dwelling  in  them,  but  are  per- 
sonified, represented  as  living,  and  capable  of  sensation  and  speech, 
and  mentioned  as  witnesses  who  would  rise  up  against  Israel,  not 
to  proclaim  its  guilt,  but  to  bear  witness  that  God,  the  Lord  of 
hei^ven  and  earth,  had  warned  the  people,  and,  as  it  is  described 
in  the  parallel  passage  in  chap.  xxx.  19,  had  set  before  them  the 
choice  of  life  and  death,  and  therefore  was  just  in  punishing  them 
for  their  unfaithfulness  (cf.  Ps.  1.  6,  li.  6).  "Prolong  days,"  as  in 
Ex.  XX.  12. — ^Ver.  27.  Jehovah  would  scatter  them  among  the 
nations,  where  they  would  perish  through  want  and  suffering,  and 
only  a  few  (^BDD  "•no.  Gen.  xxxiv.  30)  would  be  left.  "  Whither" 
refers  to  the  nations  whose  land  is  thought  of  (cf.  chap.  xii.  29, 
xxx.  3).  For  the  thing  intended,  see  Lev.  xxvi.  33,  36,  38,  39, 
and  Deut.  xxviii.  64  sqq.,  from  which  it  is  evident  that  the  author 
had  not  "the  fate  of  the  nation  in  the  time  of  the  Assyrians  in  his 
mind "  (Knobel),  but  rather  all  the  dispersions  which  would  come 
upon  the  rebellious  nation  in  future  times,  even  down  to  the  dis- 
persion under  the  Romans,  which  continues  still ;  so  that  Moses 
contemplated  the  punishment  in  its  fullest  extent. — Yer.  28.  There 


314  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

among  the  heathen  they  would  be  obliged  to  serve  gods  that  were 
the  work  of  men's  hands,  gods  of  wood  and  stone,  that  could 
neither  hear,  nor  eat,  nor  smell,  i.e.  possessed  no  senses,  showed 
no  sign  of  life.  What  Moses  threatens  here,  follows  from  the 
eternal  laws  of  the  divine  government.  The  more  refined  idolatry 
of  image-worship  leads  to  coarser  and  coarser  forms,  in  which  the 
whole  nature  of  idol-worship  is  manifested  in  all  its  pitiableness. 
"  When  once  the  God  of  revelation  is  forsaken,  the  God  of  reason 
and  imagination  must  also  soon  be  given  up  and  make  way  for  still 
lower  powers,  that  perfectly  accord  with  the  /  exalted  upon  the 
throne,  and  in  the  time  of  pretended  '  illumination '  to  atheism  and 
materialism  also"  (^Schultz). — Ver.  29.  From  thence  Israel  would 
come  to  itself  again  in  the  time  of  deepest  misery,  like  the  pro- 
digal son  in  the  gospel  (Luke  xv.  17),  would  seek  the  Lord  its 
God,  and  would  also  find  Him  if  it  sought  with  all  its  heart  and 
soul  (cf.  chap.  vi.  5,  x.  12). — Ver.  30.  ''In  tribulation  to  thee  (in 
thy  trouble),  all  these  things  (the  threatened  punishments  and 
sufferings)  will  befall  thee;  at  the  end  of  the  days  (see  at  Gen. 
xlix.  1)  thou  wilt  turn  to  Jehovah  thy  God,  and  hearken  to  His 
voice.^^  With  this  comprehensive  thought  Moses  brings  his  picture 
of  the  future  to  a  close.  (On  the  subject-matter,  vid.  Lev.  xxvi. 
39,  40.)  Keturning  to  the  Lord  and  hearkening  to  His  voice 
presuppose  that  the  Lord  will  be  found  by  those  who  earnestly 
seek  Him ;  ''for  (ver.  31)  He  is  a  merciful  God,  who  does  not  let 
His  people  go,  nor  destroy  them,  and  who  does  not  forget  the  covenant 
with  the  fathers  "  (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  42  and  45).  •^S"J'l,  to  let  loose, 
to  withdraw  the  hand  from  a  person  (Josh.  x.  6). 

Vers.  32-40.  But  in  order  to  accomplish  something  more  than 
merely  preserving  the  people  from  apostasy  by  the  threat  of 
punishment,  namely,  to  secure  a  more  faithful  attachment  and 
continued  obedience  to  His  commands  by  awakening  the  feeling 
of  cordial  love,  Moses  reminds  them  again  of  the  glorious  miracles 
of  divine  grace  performed  in  connection  with  the  election  and 
deliverance  of  Israel,  such  as  had  never  been  heard  of  from  the 
beginning  of  the  world  ;  and  with  this  strong  practical  proof  of  the 
love  of  the  true  God,  he  brings  his  first  address  to  a  close.  This 
closing  thought  in  ver.  32  is  connected  by  ""S  {for)  with  the  leading 
idea  in  ver.  31,  "  Jehovah  thy  God  is  a  merciful  God,"  to  show 
that  the  sole  ground  for  the  election  and  redemption  of  Israel  was 
the  compassion  of  God  towards  the  human  race.  "  For  ask  now  of 
the  days  that  are  past,  from  the  day  that  God  created  man  v^on  the 


I 


J 


CHAP,  IV.  32-40.  315 

earth,  and  from  one  end  of  the  heaven  unto  the  other,  whether  so  great 
a  thing  has  ever  happened,  or  anything  of  the  hind  has  been  heard  of:''' 
i.e.  the  history  of  all  times  since  the  creation  of  man,  and  of  all 
plaf:)es  under  the  whole  heaven,  can  relate  no  such  events  as  those 
which  have  happened  to  Israel,  viz.  at  Sinai  (ver.  33 ;  cf.  ver.  12). 
From  this  awfully  glorious  manifestation  of  God,  Moses  goes  back 
in  ver.  34  to  the  miracles  with  which  God  effected  the  deliverance 
of  Israel  out  of  Egypt.  "  Or  has  a  god  attempted  (made  the  at- 
tempt) to  come  and  take  to  himself  people  from  people  {i.e.  to  fetch 
the  people  of  Israel  out  of  the  midst  of  the  Egyptian  nation),  with 
temptations  (the  events  in  Egypt  by  which  Pharaoh's  relation  to 
the  Lord  was  put  to  the  test ;  cf.  chap.  vi.  22  and  vii.  18,  19),  with 
signs  and  wonders  (the  Egyptian  plagues,  see  Ex.  vii.  3),  and  with 
conflict  (at  the  Red  Sea  :  Ex.  xiv.  14,  xv.  3),  and  with  a  strong 
hand  and  outstretched  arm  (see  Ex.  vi.  6),  and  with  great  terrors  V^ 
In  the  three  points  mentioned  last,  all  the  acts  of  God  in  Egypt 
are  comprehended,  according  to  both  cause  and  effect.  They  were 
revelations  of  the  omnipotence  of  the  Lord,  and  produced  great 
terrors  (cf.  Ex.  xii.  30-36). — Ver.  35.  Israel  was  made  to  see  all 
this,  that  it  might  know  that  Jehovah  was  God  (DNi^Nn^  the  God, 
to  whom  the  name  of  Elohim  rightfully  belonged),  and  there  was 
none  else  beside  Him  (cf.  ver.  39,  xxxii.  39  ;  Isa.  xlv.  5,  6). — ^Ver. 
36.  But  the  Lord  had  spoken  to  Israel  chiefly  down  from  heaven 
(cf.  Ex.  XX.  19  (22)),  and  that  out  of  the  great  fire,  in  which  He 
had  come  down  upon  Sinai,  to  chastise  it.  "^D^  does  not  mean  "  to 
instruct  the  people  with  regard  to  His  truth  and  sovereignty,"  as 
Schultz  thinks,  but  "  to  take  them  under  holy  discipline  "  (Knobel), 
to  inspire  them  with  a  salutary  fear  of  the  holiness  of  His  ways 
and  of  His  judgments  by  the  awful  phenomena  which  accompanied 
His  descent,  and  shadowed  forth  the  sublime  and  holy  majesty  of 
His  nature. — Vers.  37-40.  All  this  He  did  from  love  to  the  fathers 
of  Israel  (the  patriarchs):  "awcZ  indeed  because  He  loved  thy  fathers, 
He  chose  his  seed  (the  seed  of  Abraham,  the  first  of  the  patriarchs) 
after  him,  and  brought  thee  (Israel)  out  of  Egypt  by  His  face  with 
great  power,  to  diive  out  .  .  .  and  to  bring  thee,  to  give  thee  their 
land  .  ,  .  so  that  thou  mightest  know  and  take  to  heart  .  .  .  and  keep 
His  laws^^  etc.  With  regard  to  the  construction  of  these  verses, 
the  clause  ""S  T\nry\  (and  because)  in  ver.  37  is  not  to  be  regarded  as 
dependent  upon  what  precedes,  as  Schultz  supposes ;  nor  are  vers. 
37  and  38  to  be  taken  as  the  protasis,  and  vers.  39,  40  as  the 
apodosis  (as  Knobel  maintains).     Both  forms  of  construction  ar« 


316  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

forced  and  unnatural.  The  verses  form  an  independent  thought ; 
and  the  most  important  point,  which  was  to  bind  Israel  to  faithful- 
ness towards  Jehovah,  is  given  as  the  sura  and  substance  of  the 
whole  address,  and  placed  as  a  protasis  at  the  head  of  the  period. 
The  only  thing  that  admits  of  dispute,  is  whether  the  apodosis 
commences  with  "^ni^^  ("  He  cJiose^^  ver.  37),  or  only  with  ^>?V^*1 
(^'brought  thee  out'^).  Either  is  possible;  and  it  makes  no  difference, 
so  far  as  the  main  thought  is  concerned,  whether  we  regard  the 
choice  of  Israel,  or  simply  the  deliverance  from  Egypt,  in  which 
that  choice  was  carried  into  practical  effect,  as  the  consequence  of 
the  love  of  Jehovah  to  the  patriarchs. — The  copula  \  before  nnn  is 
specially  emphatic,  "  and  truly,^  and  indicates  that  the  sum  and 
substance  of  the  whole  discourse  is  about  to  follow,  or  the  one 
thought  in  which  the  whole  appeal  culminates.  It  was  the  love  of 
God  to  the  fathers,  not  the  righteousness  of  Israel  (chap.  ix.  5), 
which  lay  at  the  foundation  of  the  election  of  their  posterity  to  be 
the  nation  of  Jehovah's  possession,  and  also  of  all  the  miracles  of 
grace  which  were  performed  in  connection  with  their  deliverance  out 
of  Egypt.  Moses  returns  to  this  thought  again  at  chap.  x.  15,  for 
the  purpose  of  impressing  it  upon  the  minds  of  the  people  as  the 
one  motiv^e  which  laid  them  under  the  strongest  obligation  to  cir- 
cumcise the  foreskin  of  their  heart,  and  walk  in  the  fear  and  love 
of  the  Lord  their  God  (chap.  x.  12  sqq.). — The  singular  suffixes  in 
lint  (his  seed)  and  ViriK  (after  him)  refer  to  Abraham,  whom  Moses 
had  especially  in  his  mind  when  speaking  of  "thy  fathers,"  because 
he  was  pre-eminently  the  lover  of  God  (Isa.  xli.  8 ;  2  Chron.  xx.  7), 
and  also  the  beloved  or  friend  of  God  (Jas.  ii.  23 ;  cf.  Gen.  xviii. 
17  sqq.).  ''By  His  face^^  points  back  to  Ex.  xxxiii.  14.  The  face 
of  Jehovah  was  Jehovah  in  His  personal  presence,  in  His  own 
person,  who  brought  Israel  out  of  Egypt,  to  root  out  great  and 
mighty  nations  before  it,  and  give  it  their  land  for  an  inheritance. 
''As  this  day^^  (clearly  shows),  viz.  by  the  destruction  of  Sihon 
and  Og,  which  gave  to  the  Israelites  a  practical  pledge  that  the 
Canaanites  in  like  manner  would  be  rooted  out  before  them.  The 
expression  "as  this  day"  does  not  imply,  therefore,  that  the  Ca- 
naanites were  already  rooted  out  from  their  land. — Yers.  39,  40.  By 
this  the  Israelites  were  to  know  and  lay  it  to  heart,  that  Jehovah 
alone  was  God  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  and  were  to  keep  His 
commandments,  in  order  that  ("itJ'K)  it  might  be  well  with  them 
and  their  descendants,  and  they  might  have  long  life  in  Canaan. 
D-'D^n-b,  "  all  time,"  for  all  the  future  (cf.  Ex.  xx.  12). 


CHAP.  IV.  41-43.  317 

Vers.  41-43.  Selection  of  three  Cities  of  Eefuge  for 

UNINTENTIONAL  MaNSLAYERS    ON    THE   EaST   OF   THE    JoRDAN. 

— The  account  of  this  appointment  of  the  cities  of  refug<^  in  the 
conquered  land  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan  is  inserted  between  the 
first  and  second  addresses  of  Moses,  in  all  probability  for  no  other 
reason  than  because  Moses  set  apart  the  cities  at  that  time  accord- 
ing to  the  command  of  God  in  Num.  xxxv.  6,  14,  not  only  to  give 
the  land  on  that  side  its  full  consecration,  and  thoroughly  confirm 
the  possession  of  the  two  Amoritish  kingdoms  on  the  other  side  of 
the  Jordan,  but  also  to  give  the  people  in  this  punctual  observance 
of  the  duty  devolving  upon  it  an  example  for  their  imitation  in  the 
conscientious  observance  of  the  commandments  of  the  Lord,  which 
he  was  now  about  to  lay  before  the  nation.  The  assertion  that  this 
section  neither  stood  after  Num.  xxxiv.-xxxvi.,  nor  really  belongs 
there,  has  as  little  foundation  as  the  statement  that  its  contents  are 
at  variance  with  the  precepts  in  chap.  xix.  "  Toward  the  sunrising  " 
is  introduced  as  a  more  precise  definition ;  n}"}*n  "12^^  like  •^H'JTp  in 
Num.  xxxii.  19  and  xxxiv.  15.  On  the  contents  of  ver.  42,  comp. 
Num.  xxxv.  15  sqq.  The  three  towns  that  were  set  apart  were 
Bezer,  Bamothy  and  Golan.  '^  Bezer  in  the  steppe,  (namely)  in  the 
land  of  the  level"  (the  Amoritish  table-land:  chap.  iii.  10).  The 
situation  of  this  Levitical  town  and  city  of  refuge,  which  is  only 
mentioned  again  in  Josh.  xx.  8,  xxi.  36,  and  1  Chron.  vi.  63,  has 
not  yet  been  discovered.  Bezer  was  probably  the  same  as  Bosor 
(1  Mace.  V.  36),  and  is  possibly  to  be  seen  in  the  Berza  mentioned 
by  Eobinson  (Pal.  App.  p.  170).  Ramoth  in  Gilead,  i.e.  Ramoth- 
Mizpeh  (comp.  Josh.  xx.  8  with  xiii.  26),  was  situated,  according 
to  the  Onom.,  fifteen  Roman  miles,  or  six  hours,  to  the  west  of 
Philadelphia  {Rabhath-Ammon) ;  probably,  therefore,  on  the  site 
of  the  modern  Salt,  which  is  six  hours'  journey  from  Amman  (cf. 
V.  Raumer,  Pal.  pp.  265,  266). — Golan,  in  Bashan,  according  to 
Eusehius  (s.  v.  Gaulon  or  Golan),  was  still  a  very  large  village  in 
Batanaea  even  in  his  day,  from  which  the  district  generally  received 
the  name  of  Gaulonitis  or  Jolan ;  but  it  has  not  vet  been  discovered 
again. 


318  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

II.— SECOND  ADDRESS,  OR  EXPOSITION  OF  THE  LAW. 

Chap.  iv.  44-xxvi.  19. 

This  address,  which  is  described  in  the  heading  as  the  law  which 
Moses  set  before  the  Israehtes,  commences  with  a  repetition  of  the 
decalogue,  and  a  notice  of  the  powerful  impression  which  was  made, 
through  the  proclamation  of  it  by  God  Himself,  upon  the  people 
who  were  assembled  round  Him  at  Horeb  (chap.  v.).  In  the 
first  and  more  general  part,  it  shows  that  the  true  essence  of  the 
law,  and  of  that  righteousness  which  the  Israelites  were  to  strive 
after,  consisted  in  loving  Jehovah  their  God  with  all  their  heart 
(chap,  vi.) ;  that  the  people  were  bound,  by  virtue  of  their  election 
as  the  Lord's  people  of  possession,  to  exterminate  the  Canaanites 
with  their  idolatrous  worship,  in  order  to  rejoice  in  the  blessing  of 
God  (chap,  vii.) ;  but  more  especially  that,  having  regard  on  the 
one  hand  to  the  divine  chastisement  and  humiliation  which  they 
had  experienced  in  the  desert  (chap,  viii.),  and  on  the  other  hand 
to  the  frequency  with  which  they  had  rebelled  against  their  God 
(chap.  ix.  1-x.  11),  they  were  to  beware  of  self-exaltation  and  self 
righteousness,  that  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  of  which  they  were  about 
to  take  possession,  they  might  not  forget  their  God  when  enjoying 
the  rich  productions  of  the  land,  but  might  retain  the  blessings 
of  their  God  for  ever  by  a  faithful  observance  of  the  covenant 
(chap.  x.  12-xi.  32).  Then  after  this  there  follows  an  exposition 
of  the  different  commandments  of  the  law  (chap,  xii.-xxvi.). 

Chap.  iv.  44-49.  Announcement  of  the  Discourse  upon 
THE  Law. — First  of  all,  in  ver.  44,  we  have  the  general  notice  in 
the  form  of  a  heading :  "  This  is  the  Thorah  which  Moses  set  before 
the  children  of  Israel;"  and  then,  in  vers.  45,  46,  a  fuller  description 
of  the  Thorah  according  to  its  leading  features,  "  testimonies,  statutes, 
and  rights  "  (see  at  ver.  1),  together  with  a  notice  of  the  place  and 
time  at  which  Moses  delivered  this  address.  "  On  their  coming  out 
of  Egypt^^  i.e.  not  "  after  they  had  come  out,"  but  during  the  march, 
before  they  had  reached  the  goal  of  their  journeyings,  viz.  (ver.  46) 
when  they  were  still  on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan.  "/«  the 
valley l^  as  in  chap.  iii.  29.  "/w  the  land  of  Sihon^^  and  therefore 
already  upon  ground  which  the  Lord  had  given  them  for  a  posses- 
sion.  The  importance  of  this  possession  as  the  firs^fruit  and  pledge 


CHAP.  V.  319 

of  the  '^fulfilment  of  the  further  promises  of  God,  led  Moses  to 
mention  again,  though  briefly,  the  defeat  of  the  two  kings  of  the 
Amorites,  together  with  the  conquest  of  their  land,  just  as  he  had 
done  before  in  chap.  ii.  32-36  and  iii.  1-17.  On  ver.  48,  of.  chap, 
iii.  9,  12-17.     Sion,  for  Hermon  (see  at  chap.  iii.  9). 

A.   THE  TRUE  ESSENCE  OF  THE  LAW  AND  ITS  FULFILMENT. 

Exposition  of  the  Decalogue,  and  its  Promulgation. — Chap.  v. 

The  exposition  of  the  law  commences  with  a  repetition  of  the 
ten  words  of  the  covenant,  w^hich  were  spoken  to  all  Israel  directly 
by  the  Lord  Himself. — Vers.  1-5  form  the  introduction,  and  point 
out  the  importance  and  great  significance  of  the  exposition  which 
follows.  Hence,  instead  of  the  simple  sentence  "  And  Moses  said" 
we  have  the  more  formal  statement  "  And  Moses  called  all  Israel, 
and  said  to  them^  The  great  significance  of  the  laws  and  rights 
about  to  be  set  before  them,  consisted  in  the  fact  that  they  con- 
tained the  covenant  of  Jehovah  with  Israel. — Vers.  2,  3.  *^  Jehovah 
our  God  made  a  covenant  with  us  in  Horeh;  not  with  our  fathers, 
hut  ivith  ourselves,  ivho  are  all  of  us  here  alive  this  day"  The 
"  fathers  "  are  neither  those  who  died  in  the  wilderness,  as  Augustine 
supposed,  nor  the  forefathers  in  Egypt,  as  Calvin  imagined ;  but 
the  patriarchs,  as  in  chap.  iv.  37.  Moses  refers  to  the  conclusion 
of  the  covenant  at  Sinai,  which  was  essentially  distinct  from  the 
covenant  made  with  Abraham  (Gen.  xv.  18),  though  the  latter 
laid  the  foundation  for  the  Sinaitic  covenant.  But  Moses  passed 
over  this,  as  it  was  not  his  intention  to  trace  the  historical  develop- 
ment of  the  covenant  relation,  but  simply  to  impress  upon  the  hearts 
of  the  existing  generation  the  significance  of  its  entrance  into  cove- 
nant with  the  Lord.  The  generation,  it  is  true,  with  which  God 
made  the  covenant  at  Horeb,  had  all  died  out  by  that  time,  with 
the  exception  of  Moses,  Joshua,  and  Caleb,  and  only  lived  in  the 
children,  who,  though  in  part  bom  in  Egypt,  were  all  under  twenty 
years  of  age  at  the  conclusion  of  the  covenant  at  Sinai,  and  there- 
fore were  not  among  the  persons  with  whom  the  Lord  concluded 
the  covenant.  But  the  covenant  was  made  not  with  the  particular 
individuals  who  were  then  alive,  but  rather  with  the  nation  as  an 
organic  whole.  Hence  Moses  could  with  perfect  justice  identify 
those  who  constituted  the  nation  at  that  time,  with  those  who  had 
entered  into  covenant  with   the   Lord   at   Sinai.      The  separate 


320  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

pronoun  (ive)  is  added  to  the  pronominal  suffix  for  the  sake  of 
emphasis,  just  as  in  Gen.  iv.  26,  etc. ;  and  npt?  again  is  so  con- 
nected with  linj^5,  as  to  include  the  relative  in  itself. — ^Ver.  4. 
"  Jehovah  talked  loith  you  face  to  face  in  the  mount  out  of  the  midst 
of  the  fire^'  i-e-  He  came  as  near  to  you  as  one  person  to  another. 
QtjSS  QtjQ  is  not  perfectly  synonymous  with  Q"'^Q  ^^  D''J5,  which  is 
used  in  Ex.  xxxiii.  11  with  reference  to  God's  speaking  to  Moses 
(cf.  chap,  xxxiv.  10,  and  Gen.  xxxii.  31),  and  expresses  the  very 
confidential  relation  in  which  the  Lord  spoke  to  Moses  as  one  friend 
to  another  ;  whereas  the  former  simply  denotes  the  directness  with 
which  Jehovah  spoke  to  the  people. — Before  repeating  the  ten 
words  which  the  Lord  addressed  directly  to  the  people,  Moses  intro- 
duces the  following  remark  in  ver.  5 — "  /  stood  between  Jehovah 
and  you  at  that  time,  to  announce  to  you  the  word  of  Jehovah ;  because 
ye  were  afraid  of  the  fire,  and  went  not  up  into  the  mount " — for  the 
purpose  of  showing  the  mediatorial  position  which  he  occupied  be- 
tween the  Lord  and  the  people,  not  so  much  at  the  proclamation  of 
the  ten  words  of  the  covenant,  as  in  connection  with  the  conclusion 
of  the  covenant  generally,  which  alone  in  fact  rendered  the  conclu- 
sion of  the  covenant  possible  at  all,  on  account  of  the  alarm  of  the 
people  at  the  awful  manifestation  of  the  majesty  of  the  Lord.  The 
word  of  Jehovah,  which  Moses  as  mediator  had  to  announce  to  the 
people,  had  reference  not  to  the  instructions  which  preceded  the 
promulgation  of  the  decalogue  (Ex.  xix.  11  sqq.),  but,  as  is  evident 
from  vers.  22-31,  primarily  to  the  further  communications  which 
the  Lord  was  about  to  address  to  the  nation  in  connection  with  the 
conclusion  of  the  covenant,  besides  the  ten  words  (viz.  Ex.  xx.  18, 
22— xxiii.  33),  to  which  in  fact  the  whole  of  the  Sinaitic  legislation 
really  belongs,  as  being  the  further  development  of  the  covenant 
laws.  The  alarm  of  the  people  at  the  fire  is  more  fully  described 
in  vers.  25  sqq.  The  word  "  saying""^  at  the  end  of  ver.  5  is  de- 
pendent upon  the  word  "  talked"*^  in  ver.  4 ;  ver.  5  simply  contain- 
ing a  parenthetical  remark. 

In  vers.  6—21,  the  ten  covenant  words  are  repeated  from  Ex.  xx., 
with  only  a  few  variations,  which  have  already  been  discussed  in 
connection  with  the  exposition  of  the  decalogue  at  Ex.  xx.  1-14. — 
In  vers.  22-33,  Moses  expounds  still  further  the  short  account  in 
Ex.  XX.  18-21,  viz.  that  after  the  people  had  heard  the  ten  covenant 
words,  in  their  alarm  at  the  awful  phenomena  in  which  the  Lord 
revealed  His  glory,  they  entreated  him  to  stand  between  as  mediator, 
that  God  Himself  might  not  speak  to  them  any  further,  and  that 


CHAP.  VI.  1-3.  321 

they  might  not  die,  and  then  promised  that  they  would  hearken  to 
all  that  the  Lord  should  speak  to  him  (vers.  23-31).  His  purpose 
in  doing  so  was  to  link  on  the  exhortation  in  vers.  32,  33,  to  keep 
all  the  commandments  of  the  Lord  and  do  them,  which  paves  the 
way  for  passing  to  the  exposition  of  the  law  which  follows.  "  A  great 
voice^^  (ver.  22)  is  an  adverbial  accusative,  signifying  "  with  a  great 
voice"  (cf.  Ges.  §  118,  3).  "  And  He  added  no  more :"  as  in  Num. 
xi.  25.  God  spoke  the  ten  words  directly  to  the  people,  and  then 
no  more ;  i.e.  everything  further  He  addressed  to  Moses  alone,  and 
through  his  mediation  to  the  people.  As  mediator  He  gave  him 
the  two  tables  of  stone,  upon  which  He  had  written  the  decalogue 
(cf.  Ex.  xxxi.  18).  This  statement  somewhat  forestalls  the  historical 
course ;  and  in  chap.  ix.  10,  11,  it  is  repeated  again  in  its  proper 
historical  connection. — Yers.  24-27  contain  a  rhetorical,  and  at  the 
same  time  really  a  more  exact,  account  of  the  events  described  in 
Ex.  XX.  18-20  (15-17),  and  already  expounded  in  vol.  ii.  p.  125. 
rifc^l  (ver.  24),  a  contraction  of  "^^^fl,  as  in  Num.  xi.  15  (cf.  Ewald, 
§  184,  a.).  Jehovah's  reply  to  the  words  of  the  people  (vers.  28-31) 
is  passed  over  in  Ex.  xx.  God  approved  of  what  the  people  said, 
because  it  sprang  from  a  consciousness  of  the  unworthiness  of  any 
sinner  to  come  into  the  presence  of  the  holy  God ;  and  He  added, 
"  Would  that  there  were  always  this  heart  in  them  to  fear  Me," 
i.e,  would  that  they  were  always  of  the  same  mind  to  fear  Me  and 
keep  all  My  commandments,  that  it  might  be  well  with  them  and 
their  children  for  ever.  He  then  directed  the  people  to  return  to 
their  tents,  and  appointed  Moses  as  the  mediator,  to  whom  He  would 
address  all  the  law,  that  he  might  teach  it  to  the  people  (cf.  chap, 
iv.  5).  Having  been  thus  entreated  by  the  people  to  take  the  office 
of  mediator,  and  appointed  to  that  office  by  the  Lord,  Moses  could 
very  well  bring  his  account  of  these  events  to  a  close  (vers.  32,  33), 
by  exhorting  them  to  observe  carefully  all  the  commandments  of 
the  Lord,  and  not  to  turn  aside  to  the  right  hand  or  to  the  left, 
i.e.  not  to  depart  in  any  way  from  the  mode  of  life  pointed  out  in 
the  commandments  (cf.  chap.  xvii.  11,  20,  xxviii.  14 ;  Josh.  i.  7, 
etc.),  that  it  might  be  well  with  them,  etc.  (cf.  chap.  iv.  40).  2it31, 
perfect  with  )  rel.  instead  of  the  imperfect. 

On  loving  JehovaJij  the  one  God,  with  all  the  Heart. — Chap.  vi. 

Vers.  1—3.  Announcement  of  the  commandments  which  follow, 
with  a  statement  of  the  reason  for  communicating  them,  and  the 
beneficent  results  of  their  observance,     '"ijvrsn,  that  which  is  com- 

PENT. VOL.  III.  X 


322  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


i 


manded,  i.e.  the  substance  of  all  that  Jehovah  had  commanded, 
synonymous  therefore  with  the  Tliorah  (chap.  iv.  44).  The  words, 
"  the  statutes  and  the  rights,^*  are  explanatory  of  and  in  apposition  to 
"  the  commandment^^  These  commandments  Moses  was  to  teach  the 
Israelites  to  keep  in  the  land  which  they  were  preparing  to  possess  .^ 
(cf.  chap.  iv.  1). — Yer.  2.  The  reason  for  communicating  the  law  f  | 
was  to  awaken  the  fear  of  God  (cf.  chap.  iv.  10,  v.  26),  and,  in  fact, 
such  fear  of  Jehovah  as  would  show  itself  at  all  times  in  the  observ- 
ance of  every  commandment.  "  Thou  and  thy  son  :"  this  forms  the 
subject  to  "  thou  mightest  fear^^  and  is  placed  at  the  end  for  the  sake 
of  emphasis.  The  Hiphil  '^'^'^^^  has  not  the  transitive  meaning, 
"  to  make  long,"  as  in  chap.  v.  30,  but  the  intransitive,  to  last 
long,  as  in  chap.  v.  16,  Ex.  xx.  12,  etc. — Ver.  3.  The  maintenance 
of  the  fear  of  God  would  bring  prosperity,  and  the  increase  of  the 
nation  promised  to  the  fathers.  In  form  this  thought  is  not  con- 
nected with  ver.  3  as  the  apodosis,  but  it  is  appended  to  the  leading 
thought  in  ver.  1  by  the  words,  ''Hear  therefore,  0  Israel  I  ^^  which 
correspond  to  the  expression  "  to  teach  you*^  in  ver.  1.  '^^^^,  that, 
in  order  that  (as  in  chap.  ii.  25,  iv.  10,  etc.).  The  increase  of  the 
nation  had  been  promised  to  the  patriarchs  from  the  very  first  (Gen. 
xii.  1 ;  see  vol.  i.  p.  193  ;  cf .  Lev.  xxvi.  9). — On  "  milk  and  honey ^^  _ . 
see  at  Ex.  iii.  8.  I 

Vers.  4-9.  With  ver.  4  the  burden  of  the  law  commences, 
which  is  not  a  new  law  added  to  the  ten  commandments, but  simply^—, 
^he  development  and  unfolding  of  the  covenant  laws  and  rights  f  | 
enclosed  as  a  germ  in  the  decalogue,  simply  an  exposition  of  the  law, 
as  had  already  been  announced  in  chap.  i.  5.  The  exposition  com- 
mences with  an  explanation  and  enforcing  of  the  first  commandment. 
There  are  two  things  contained  in  it :  (1)  that  Jehovah  is  the  one 
absolute  God ;  (2)  that  He  requires  love  with  all  the  heart,  all  the 
soul,  and  all  the  strength.  ''Jehovah  our  God  is  one  JehovahP^ 
This  does  not  mean  Jehovah  is  one  God,  Jehovah  alone  {Ahenezra), 
for  in  that  case  n^?  njn^  would  be  used  instead  of  '^^^5  ^^T\\ ;  still 
less  Jehovah  our  God,  namely,  Jehovah  is  one  {J.  H.  Michaelis). 

^  On  the  majuscula  y  and  T  in  )yo'^  and  iriK,  R-  BocTiin  has  this  remark : 
"  It  is  possible  to  confess  one  God  with  the  mouth,  although  the  heart  is  far 
from  Him.  For  this  reason  j;  and  T  are  majuscula^  from  which  with  tsere  sub- 
scribed the  word  ly,  '  a  witness,'  is  formed,  that  every  one  may  know,  when 
he  professes  the  unity  of  God,  that  his  heart  ought  to  be  engaged,  and  free  from 
every  other  thought,  because  God  is  a  witness  and  knows  all  things"  (/.  H. 
Mich.  Bibl  Hehr.). 


CHAP.  VI.  4-9.  323 

ins  T\)r\\  together  form  the  predicate  of  the  sentence.  The  idea  is 
not,  Jehovah  our  God  is  one  (the  only)  God,  but  "  one  (or  the  only) 
Jehovah  :"  not  in  this  sense,  however,  that  "  He  has  not  adopted  one 
mode  of  revelation  or  appearance  here  and  another  there,  but  one 
mode  only,  viz.  the  revelation  which  Israel  had  received"  (Schidtz)  ; 
for  Jehovah  never  denotes  merely  a  mode  in  which  the  true  God  is 
revealed  or  appears,  but  God  as  the  absolute,  unconditioned,  or  God 
according  to  the  absolute  independence  and  constancy  of  His  actions 
(see  vol.  i.  pp.  72-5).  Hence  what  is  predicated  here  of  Jehovah 
(Jehovah  one)  does  not  relate  to  the  unity  of  God,  but  simply  states 
that  it  is  to  Him  alone  that  the  name  Jehovah  rightfully  belongs, 
that  He  is  the  one  absolute  God,  to  whom  no  other  Elohim  can  be 
compared.  This  is  also  the  meaning  of  the  same  expression  in 
Zech.  xiv.  9,  where  the  words  added,  "  and  His  name  one,"  can 
only  signify  that  in  the  future  Jehovah  would  be  acknowledged  as 
the  one  absolute  God,  as  King  over  all  the  earth.  This  clause  not 
merely  precludes  polytheism,  but  also  syncretism,  which  reduces 
the  one  absolute  God  to  a  national  deity,  a  Baal  (Hos.  ii.  18),  and 
in  fact  every  form  of  theism  and  deism,  which  creates  for  itself  a 
supreme  God  according  to  philosophical  abstractions  and  ideas. 
For  Jehovah,  although  the  absolute  One,  is  not  an  abstract  notion 
like  "absolute  being"  or  "the  absolute  idea,"  but  the  absolutely 
living  God,  as  He  made  Himself  known  in  His  deeds  in  Israel  for 
the  salvation  of  the  whole  world. — Ver.  5.  As  the  one  God,  there- 
fore, Israel  was  to  love  Jehovah  its  God  with  all  its  heart,  with  all 
its  soul,  and  with  all  its  strength.  The  motive  for  this  is  to  be 
found  in  the  words  "  thy  God,"  in  the  fact  that  Jehovah  was  Israel's 
God,  and  had  manifested  Himself  to  it  as  one  God.  The  demand 
J*  with  all  the  heart"  excludes  all  half-heartedness,  all  division  of 
the  heart  in  its  love.  The  heart  is  mentioned  first,  as  the  seat  of 
the  emotions  generally  and  of  love  in  particular ;  then  follows  the 
soul  (nephesh)  as  the  centre  of  personality  in  man,  to  depict  the  love 
as  pervading  the  entire  self-consciousness;  and  to  this  is  added, 
"  with  all  the  strength,"  sc.  of  body  and  soul.  Loving  the  Lord 
with  all  the  heart  and  soul  and  strength  is  placed  at  the  head,  ae 
the  spiritual  principle  from  which  the  observance  of  the  command- 
ments was  to  flow  (see  also  chap.  xi.  1,  xxx.  6).  It  was  in  love 
that  the  fear  of  the  Lord  (chap.  x.  12),  hearkening  to  His  com- 
mandments (chap.  xi.  lo),  and  the  observance  of  the  whole  law 
(chap.  xi.  22),  were  to  be  manifested;  but  love  itself  was  to  be 
shown  by  walking  in  all  ^^^3  ways  of  the  Lord  (chap.  xi.  22,  xix. 


324  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


to 

i 


9,  XXX.  16).  Christ  therefore  calls  the  command  to  love  God 
with  all  the  heart  "  the  first  and  great  commandment,"  and  places 
on  a  par  with  this  the  commandment  contained  in  Lev.  xix.  8  to 
love  one's  neighbour  as  oneself,  and  then  observes  that  on  these 
two  commandments  hang  all  the  law  and  the  prophets  (Matt,  xxii 
37-40;  Mark  xii.  29-31;  Luke  x.  27).^  _Even  the  gospel  knows 
,  no  higher  commandment  than  this...  The  distinction  between  the 
new  covenant  and  the  old  consists  simply  in  this,  that  the  love  of 
God  which  the  gospel  demands  of  its  professors,  is  more  intensive 
and  cordial  than  that  which  the  law  of  Moses  demanded  of  thefll 
Israelites,  according  to  the  gradual  unfolding  of  the  love  of  God 
Himself,  which  was  displayed  in  a  much  grander  and  more  glorious 
form  in  the  gift  of  His  only  begotten  Son  for  our  redemption,  than 
in  the  redemption  of  Israel  out  of  the  bondage  of  Eg}^pt. — Vers.  6 
sqq.  But  for  the  love  of  God  to  be  of  the  right  kind,  the  command-  _  _ 
ments  of  God  must  be  laid  to  heart,  and  be  the  constant  subject  o^fll 
thought  and  conversation.  "  Upon  thine  heart  :^'  i.e.  the  command- 
ments of  God  were  to  be  an  affair  of  the  heart,  and  not  merely  of 
the  memory  (cf.  chap.  xi.  18).  They  were  to  be  enforced  upon 
the  children,  talked  of  at  home  and  by  the  way,  in  the  evening  on 
lying  down  and  in  the  morning  on  rising  up,  i.e.  everywhere  and 
at  all  times  ;  they  were  to  be  bound  upon  the  hand  for  a  sign,  and 
worn  as  bands  (frontlets)  between  the  eyes  (see  at  Ex.  xiii.  16). 
As  these  words  are  figurative,  and  denote  an  undeviating  observance 
of  the  divine  commands,  so  also  the  commandment  which  follows, 
viz.  to  write  the  words  upon  the  door-posts  of  the  house,  and  also 
upon  the  gates,  are  to  be  understood  spiritually ;  and  the  literal  ful- 
filment of  such  a  command  could  only  be  a  praiseworthy  custom  or 
well-pleasing  to  God  when  resorted  to  as  the  means  of  keeping  the 
commandments  of  God  constantly  before  the  eye.  The  precept 
itself,  however,  presupposes  the  existence  of  this  custom,  which  is 
not  only  met  with  in  the  Mahometan  countries  of  the  East  at  the 

^  In  quoting  this  commandment,  Matthew  (xxii.  37)  has  substituted  heipotxj 
*'  thy  mind,"  for  "  thy  strength,"  as  being  of  especial  importance  to  spiritual 
love,  whereas  in  the  LXX.  the  mind  (^locpoix)  is  substituted  for  the  heart. 
;  Mark  (xii.  30)  gives  the  triad  of  Deuteronomy  (heart,  soul,  and  strength) ;  but 
•'*Helias  inserted  ''''mind''''  (Itxuotot)  before  strength  (iapc^s),  whilst  in  ver.  33  the 
tender  Stan  ding  (avueatg)  is  mentioned  between  the  heart  and  the  soul.  Lastly, 
Luke  has  given  the  three  ideas  of  the  original  passage  quite  correctly,  but  has  ^ 
added  at  the  end,  "and  with  all  thy  mind"  (hui/oio.).  Although  the  term ■ 
liMvoix  (mind)  originated  with  the  Septuagint,  not  one  of  the  Evangelists  has 
adhered  strictly  to  this  version. 


fl 


I 


CHAP.  VI.  10-19.  325 

present  day  (cf.  A.  Russell,  Naturgesch,  v.  Aleppo,  i.  p.  36 ;  Lane^ 
Sitten  u.  Gehr,  i.  pp.  6,  13,  ii.  p.  71),  but  was  also  a  common 
custom  in  ancient  Egypt  (cf.  Wilkinson,  Manners  and  Customs, 
vol.  ii.  p.  102).^ 

Yers.  10-19.  To  the  positive  statement  of  the  command  there 
is  attached,  in  the  next  place,  the  negative  side,  or  a  warning  against 
the  danger  to  which  prosperity  and  an  abundance  of  earthly  goods 
so  certainly  expose,  viz.  of  forgetting  the  Lord  and  His  manifesta- 
tions of  mercy.  The  Israelites  were  all  the  more  exposed  to  this 
danger,  as  their  entrance  into  Canaan  brought  them  into  the  pos- 
session of  all  the  things  conducive  to  well-being,  in  which  the  land 
abounded,  without  being  under  the  necessity  of  procuring  these 
things  by  the  labour  of  their  own  hands; — into  the  possession, 
namely,  of  great  and  beautiful  towns  which  they  had  not  built,  of 
houses  full  of  all  kinds  of  good  things  which  they  had  not  filled,  of 
wells  ready  made  which  they  had  not  dug,  of  vineyards  and  olive- 
plantations  which  they  had  not  planted. — The  nouns  D''iy,  etc.  are 
formally  dependent  upon  '^>  T\Tb^  and  serve  as  a  detailed  description 
of  the  land  into  which  the  Lord  was  about  to  lead  His  people. — 
Ver.  12.  ''House  of  bondage^^  as  in  Ex.  xiii.  3.  ''  Not  forgetting^* 
is  described  from  a  positive  point  of  view,  as  fearing  God,  serving 
Him,  and  sxcearing  hy  His  name.  Fear  is  placed  first,  as  the  funda- 
mental characteristic  of  the  Israelitish  worship  of  God ;  it  was  no 
slavish  fear,  but  simply  the  holy  awe  of  a  sinner  before  the  holy 
God,  which  includes  love  rather  than  excludes  it.  "  Fearing  "  is 
a  matter  of  the  heart ;  "  serving,"  a  matter  of  working  and  striving  ; 
and  "swearing  in  His  name,"  the  practical  manifestation  of  the 
worship  of  God  in  word  and  conversation.  It  refers  not  merely  to 
a  solemn  oath  before  a  judicial  court,  but  rather  to  asseverations  on 
oath  in  the  ordinary  intercourse  of  life,  by  which  the  religious  atti- 
tude of  a  man  involuntarily  reveals  itself. — Vers.  14  sqq.  The  wor- 
ship of  Jehovah  not  only  precludes  all  idolatry,  which  the  Lord,  as 
a  jealous  God,  will  not  endure  (see  at  Ex.  xx.  5),  but  will  punish 
with  destruction  from  the  earth  ("  the  face  of  the  ground,"  as  in 
Ex.  xxxii.  12)  ;   but  it   also  excludes   tempting  the   Lord  by  an 

^  The  Jewish  custom  of  the  Medusah  is  nothing  but  a  formal  and  outward 
observance  founded  upon  this  command.  It  consists  in  writing  the  words  of 
Dent.  vi.  4-9  and  xi.  13-20  upon  a  piece  of  parchment,  which  is  then  placed 
upon  the  top  of  the  doorway  of  houses  and  rooms,  enclosed  in  a  wooden  box  ; 
this  box  they  touch  with '  the  finger  and  then  kiss  the  finger  on  going  either 
out  or  in.  S.  Buxtorf^  Synag.  Jud.  pp.  582  sqq. ;  and  Bodenschatz,  Kirchl.  Ver- 
fassung  der  Juden^  iv.  pp.  19  sqq. 


326  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


1 


unbelieving  murmuring  against  God,  if  He  does  not  remove  any- 
kind  of  distress  immediately,  as  the  people  had  already  sinned  at 
Massah,  i.e.  at  Eephidim  (Ex.  xvii.  1-7). — Vers.  17-19.  They 
were  rather  to  observe  all  His  commandments  diligently,  and  do 
what  was  right  and  good  in  His  eyes.  The  infinitive  '1^1  ^"inp  con- 
tains the  further  development  of  'Ii1 1^''^  \V07  :  "  so  that  He  (Jehovah) 
thrust  out  all  thine  enemies  before  thee,  as  He  hath  spoken  "  (viz.  Ex.  MM 
xxiii.  27  sqq.,  xxxiv.  11).  ■■ 

In  vers.  20—25,  the  teaching  to  the  children,  which  is  only 
briefly  hinted  at  in  ver.  7,  is  more  fully  explained.  The  Israelites 
were  to  instruct  their  children  and  descendants  as  to  the  nature, 
meaning,  and  object  of  the  commandments  of  the  Lord ;  and  in 
reply  to  the  inquiries  of  their  sons,  to  teach  them  what  the  Lord  had 
done  for  the  redemption  of  Israel  out  of  the  bondage  of  Egypt, 
and  how  He  had  brought  them  into  the  promised  land,  and  thus 
to  awaken  in  the  younger  generation  love  to  the  Lord  and  to  His 
commandments.  The  "  great  and  sore  miracles  "  (ver.  22)  were  the 
^Egyptian  plagues,  like  Q^J^^b,  in  chap.  iv.  34. — "  To  fear^^  etc.,  i.e. 
that  we  might  fear  the  Lord. — Ver.  25.  "  And  righteousness  will  he 
to  us,  if  we  observe  to  do : "  i.e.  our  righteousness  will  consist  in  the 
observance  of  the  law  ;  we  shall  be  regarded  and  treated  by  God  as 
righteous,  if  we  are  diligent  in  the  observance  of  the  law.  "  Before 
Jehovah "  refers  primarily,  no  doubt,  to  the  expression,  "  to  do  all 
these  commandments ; "  but,  as  we  may  see  from  chap.  xxiv.  13,  this  __ , 
does  not  prevent  the  further  reference  to  the  "  righteousness  "  also.  jH  | 
^  This  righteousness  before  Jehovah,  it  is  true,  is  not  really  the 
)  gospel  "  righteousness  of  faith ; "  but  there  is  no  opposition  between 
/  the  two,  as  the  righteousness  mentioned  here  is  not  founded  upon 
the  outward  (pharisaic)  righteousness  of  works,  but  upon  an  earnest 
striving  after  the  fulfilment  of  the  law,  to  love  God  with  all  the 
heart ;  and  this  love  is  altogether  impossible  without  living  faith. 

Command  to  destroy  the  Canaanites  and  their  Idolatry. — Chap.  vii. 

Vers.  1-11.  As  the  Israelites  were  warned  against  idolatry  in 
chap.  vi.  14,  so  here  are  they  exhorted  to  beware  of  the  false  toler- 
ance of  sparing  the  Canaanites  and  enduring  their  idolatry. — Vers. 
15.  When  the  Lord  drove  out  the  tribes  of  Canaan  before  the 
Israelites,  and  gave  them  up  to  them  and  smote  them,  they  were  to 
put  them  under  the  ban  (see  at  Lev.  xxvii.  28),  to  make  no  treaty 
with  them,  and  to  contract  no  marriage  with  them,  p^^^,  to  draw 
out,  to  cast  away,  e.g.  the  sandals  (Ex.  iii.  5)  ;  here  and  ver.  22  it 


CHAP.  VII.  1-11.  327 

signifies  to  draw  out,  or  drive  out  a  nation  from  its  country  and 
possessions :  it  occurs  in  this  sense  in  the  Piel  in  2  Kings  xvi.  6. 
On  the  Canaanitish  tribes,  see  at  Gen.  x.  15  sqq.^  and  xv.  20,  21. 
There  are  seven  of  them  mentioned  here,  as  in  Josh.  iii.  10  and 
xxiv.  11 ;  on  the  other  hand,  there  are  only  six  in  chap.  xx.  17,  as 
in  Ex.  iii.  8,  17,  xxiii.  23,  and  xxxiii.  2,  the  Girgashites  being 
omitted.  The  prohibition  against  making  a  covenant,  as  in  Ex. 
xxiii.  32  and  xxxiv.  12,  and  that  against  marrying,  as  in  Ex.  xxxiv. 
16,  where  the  danger  of  the  Israelites  being  drawn  away  to  idolatry 
is  mentioned  as  a  still  further  reason  for  these  commands.  'T'p^  ""aj 
"/or  he  (the  Canaanite)  will  cause  thy  son  to  turn  away  from  behind 
me,"  i.e.  tempt  him  away  from  following  me,  "  to  sei^e  other  gods." 
Moses,  says  "  from  following  me,"  because  he  is  speaking  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah.  The  consequences  of  idolatry,  as  in  chap.  vi.  15, 
iv.  26,  etc. — Ver.  5.  The  Israelites  were  rather  to  destroy  the  altars 
and  idols  of  the  Canaanites,  according  to  the  command  in  Ex. 
xxxiv.  13,  xxiii.  24. — Vers.  6-8.  They  were  bound  to  do  this  by 
virtue  of  their  election  as  a  holy  nation,  the  nation  of  possession, 
which  Jehovah  had  singled  out  from  all  other  nations,  and  brought 
out  of  the  bondage  of  Egypt,  not  because  of  its  greatness,  but  from 
love  to  them,  and  for  the  sake  of  the  oath  given  to  the  fathers. 
This  exalted  honour  Israel  was  not  to  cast  away  by  apostasy  from 
the  Lord.  It  was  founded  upon  the  word  of  the  Lord  in  Ex.  xix. 
5,  6,  which  Moses  brought  to  the  recollection  of  the  people,  and 
expressly  and  emphatically  developed.  "  Not  because  of  your  multi- 
tude before  all  7iations  (because  ye  were  more  numerous  than  all 
other  nations)  hath  Jehovah  turned  to  you  in  love  (P^Hj  to  bind  one- 
self with,  to  hang  upon  a  person,  out  of  love),  for  ye  are  the  little- 
ness of  all  nations  "  (the  least  numerous).  Moses  could  say  this  to 
Israel  with  reference  to  its  descent  from  Abraham,  whom  God 
chose  as  the  one  man  out  of  all  the  world,  whilst  nations,  states, 
and  kingdoms  had  already  been  formed  all  around  (Baumgarten). 
"  But  because  Jehovah  loved  you,  and  kept  His  oath  which  He  had 
sworn  to  the  fathers,  He  hath  brought  you  out,"  etc.  Instead  of  saying. 
He  hath  chosen  you  out  of  love  to  your  fathers,  as  in  chap.  iv.  37, 
Moses  brings  out  in  this  place  love  to  the  people  of  Israel  as  the 
divine  motive,  not  for  choosing  Israel,  but  for  leading  it  out  and 
delivering  it  from  the  slave-house  of  Egypt,  by  which  God  had' 
practically  carried  out  the  election  of  the  people,  that  He  might 
thereby  allure  the  Israelites  to  a  reciprocity  of  love. — ^Vers.  9-11. 
Bv  this  was  Israel  to  know  that  Jehovah  their  God  was  the  true 


328  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

God,  the  faithful  God,  who  keeps  His  covenant,  showing  mercy  to 
those  who  love  Him,  even  to  the  thousandth  generation,  but  repaying 
those  who  hate  Him  to  the  face.  This  development  of  the  nature 
of  God  Moses  introduces  from  Ex.  xx.  5,  6,  as  a  light  warning  not 
to  forfeit  the  mercy  of  God,  or  draw  upon  themselves  His  holy 
wrath  by  falHng  into  idolatry.  To  this  end  He  emphatically  carries 
out  still  further  the  thought  of  retribution,  by  adding  i'T'^&?']?,  "  to 
destroy  Jiim "  (the  hater),  and  'lil  "inx''  ^b,  "  He  delays  not  to  His 
hater  (sc.  to  repay  him)  ;  He  will  repay  him  to  his  facer  "  To  the 
face  of  every  one  of  them"  i.e.  that  they  may  see  and  feel  that  they 
are  smitten  by  God  (Rosenmiiller). — Yer.  11.  This  energy  of  the 
grace  and  holiness  of  the  faithful  covenant  God  was  a  powerful 
admonition  to  keep  the  divine  commandments. 

Vers.  12-26.  The  observance  of  these  commandments  would 
also  bring  great  blessings  (vers.  12-16).  "  If  ye  hearken  to  these 
demands  of  right"  (mishpatim)  of  the  covenant  Lord  upon  His 
covenant  people,  and  keep  them  and  do  them,  "  Jehovah  will  keep 
unto  thee  the  covenant  and  the  mercy  which  He  hath  sworn  to  thy 
fathers."  In  2\>V,  for  ^m  2pv  (Gen.  xxii.  18),  there  is  involved 
not  only  the  idea  of  reciprocity,  but  everywhere  also  an  allusion  to 
reward  or  punishment  (cf.  chap.  viii.  20 ;  Num.  xiv.  24).  ^DH  was 
the  favour  displayed  in  the  promises  given  to  the  patriarchs  on  oath 
(Gen.  xxii.  16). — Ver.  13.  This  mercy  flowed  from  the  love  of  God 
to  Israel,  and  the  love  was  manifested  in  blessing  and  multiplying 
the  people.  The  blessing  is  then  particularized,  by  a  further  ex- 
pansion of  Ex.  xxiii.  25-27,  as  a  blessing  upon  the  fruit  of  the 
body,  the  fruits  of  the  field  and  soil,  and  the  rearing  of  cattle,  "ijtt^, 
see  Ex.  xiii.  12.  \^)i  nnn^y  only  occurs  again  in  Deut.  xxviii.  4, 
18,  51,  and  certainly  signifies  the  young  increase  of  the  flocks.  It 
is  probably  a  Canaanitish  word,  derived  from  Ashtoreth  (Astharte), 
the  female  deity  of  the  Canaanites,  which  was  regarded  as  the 
conceiving  and  birth-giving  principle  of  nature,  literally  Veneres, 
i.e.  amores  gregis,  hence  soholes  {Ges.)  ;  just  as  the  Latin  poets 
employ  the  name  Ceres  to  signify  the  corn,  Venus  for  love  and 
sexual  intercourse,  and  Lucina  for  birth.  On  vers.  14  and  15,  see 
Ex.  xxiii.  26.  In  ver.  15,  the  promise  of  the  preservation  of  Israel 
from  all  diseases  (Ex.  xv.  26,  and  xxiii.  25)  is  strengthened  by  the 
addition  of  the  clause,  "  all  the  evil  diseases  of  Egypt"  by  which, 
according  to  chap,  xxviii.  27,  we  are  probably  to  understand  chiefly 
the  malignant  species  of  leprosy  called  elephantiasis,  and  possibly 
also  the  plague  and  other  malignant  forms  of  disease.     In  Egypt^ 


CHAP.  VII.  12-26.  329 

diseases  for  the  most  part  readily  assume  a  very  dangerous  character. 
Pliny  (h.  n.  xxvi.  1)  calls  Egypt  the  genitrix  of  contagious  pestilence, 
and  modem  naturalists  have  confirmed  this  (see  Hengstenherg,  Egypt 
and  the  Books  of  Moses,  p.  215;  and  Pruner,  Krankheiten  des  Orients, 
pp.  460  sqq.).  Diseases  of  this  kind  the  Lord  would  rather  bring 
upon  the  enemies  of  Israel.  The  Israelites,  on  the  other  hand, 
should  be  so  strong  and  vigorous,  that  they  would  devour,  i.e.  exter- 
minate, all  the  nations  which  their  God  would  give  into  their  hands 
(cf .  Num.  xiv.  9).  With  this  thought  Moses  reverts  with  emphasis 
to  the  command  to  root  out  the  Canaanites  without  reserve,  and 
not  to  serve  their  gods,  because  they  would  become  a  snare  to  them 
(see  Ex.  x.  7)  ;  and  then  in  vers.  17-26  he  carries  out  still  further 
the  promise  in  Ex.  xxiii.  27-30  of  the  successful  subjugation  of  the 
Canaanites  through  the  assistance  of  the  Lord,  and  sweeps  away  all 
the  objections  that  a  weak  faith  might  raise  to  the  execution  of  the 
divine  command. — Vers.  17-26.  To  suppress  the  thought  that  was 
rising  up  in  their  heart,  how  could  it  be  possible  for  them  to  destroy 
these  nations  which  were  more  numerous  than  they,  the  Israelites 
were  to  remember  what  the  Lord  had  done  in  Egypt  and  to  Pharaoh, 
namely,  the  great  temptations,  signs,  and  wonders  connected  with 
their  deliverance  from  Egypt  (cf.  chap.  iv.  34  and  vi.  22).  He 
would  do  just  the  same  to  the  Canaanites. — Ver.  20.  He  would 
also  send  hornets  against  them,  as  He  had  already  promised  in  Ex. 
xxiii.  28  (see  the  passage),  until  all  that  were  left  and  had  hidden 
themselves  should  have  utterly  perished. — Vers.  21  sqq.  Israel  had 
no  need  to  be  afraid  of  them,  as  Jehovah  was  in  the  midst  of  it  a 
mighty  God  and  terrible.  He  would  drive  out  the  nations,  but 
only  gradually,  as  He  had  already  declared  to  Moses  in  Ex.  xxiii. 
30,  31,  and  would  smite  them  with  great  confusion,  till  they  were 
destroyed,  as  was  the  case  for  example  at  Gibeon  (Josh.  x.  10;  cf. 
Ex.  xxiii.  27,  where  the  form  D^n  is  used  instead  of  D^n),  and  would 
also  deliver  their  kings  into  the  hand  of  Israel,  so  that  their  names 
should  vanish  under  the  heaven  (cf.  chap.  ix.  14,  xxv.  19 ;  and  for 
the  fulfilment.  Josh.  x.  22  sqq.,  xi.  12,  xii.  7-24).  No  one  would 
be  able  to  stand  before  Israel. — ^Ver.  24.  "  To  stand  before  thee :" 
lit.  to  put  oneself  in  the  face  of  a  person,  so  as  to  withstand  him. 
rmn  for  TOE'n,  as  in  Lev.  xiv.  43,  etc.— Vers.  2b,  2Q.  Trusting 
to  this  promise,  the  Israelites  were  to  burn  up  the  idols  of  the 
Canaanites,  and  not  to  desire  the  silver  and  gold  upon  them  (with 
which  the  statues  were  overlaid :  see  vol.  ii.  p.  222),  or  take  it  to 
themselves,  lest  they  should  be  snared  in  it,  i.e.  lest  the  silver  and 


330  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

gold  should  become  a  snare  to  them.  It  would  become  so,  not  from 
any  danger  lest  they  should  practise  idolatry  with  it,  but  because 
silver  and  gold  which  had  been  used  in  connection  with  idolatrous 
worship  was  an  abomination  to  Jehovah,  which  the  Israelites  were 
not  to  bring  into  their  houses,  lest  they  themselves  should  fall 
under  the  ban,  to  which  all  the  objects  connected  with  idolatry  were 
devoted,  as  the  history  of  Achan  in  Josh.  vii.  clearly  proves.  For 
this  reason,  any  such  abomination  was  to  be  abhorred,  and  destroyed 
by  burning  or  grinding  to  powder  (cf.  Ex.  xxxii.  20 ;  2  Kings 
xxiii.  4,  5  ;  2  Chron.  xv.  16). 

Review  of  the  Guidance  of  God,  and  their  Humiliation  in  the  Desert, 
as  a  Warning  against  Highmindedness  and  Forgetfulness  of  God, 
— Chap.  viii. 

Vers.  1-6.  In  addition  to  the  danger  of  being  drawn  aside  to 
transgress  the  covenant,  by  sparing  the  Canaanites  and  their  idols 
out  of  pusillanimous  compassion  and  false  tolerance,  the  Israelites 
would  be  especially  in  danger,  after  their  settlement  in  Canaan,  of 
falling  into  pride  and  forgetfulness  of  God,  when  enjoying  the 
abundant  productions  of  that  land.  To  guard  against  this  danger, 
Moses  set  before  them  how  the  Lord  had  sought  to  lead  and  train 
them  to  obedience  by  temptations  and  humiliations  during  their 
journey  through  the  desert.  In  order  that  his  purpose  in  doing 
this  might  be  clearly  seen,  he  commenced  (ver.  1)  with  the  renewed 
admonition  to  keep  the  whole  law  which  he  commanded  them  that 
day,  that  they  might  live  and  multiply  and  attain  to  the  possession 
of  the  promised  land  (cf.  chap.  iv.  1,  vi.  3). — Yer.  2.  To  this  end 
they  were  to  remember  the  forty  years'  guidance  through  the  wil- 
derness (chap.  i.  31,  ii.  7),  by  which  God  desired  to  humble  them, 
and  to  prove  the  state  of  their  heart  and  their  obedience.  Humili- 
ation was  the  way  to  prove  their  attitude  towards  God.  nsj;,  to 
humble,  i.e.  to  bring  them  by  means  of  distress  and  privations  to 
feel  their  need  of  help  and  their  dependence  upon  God.  nDJ,  to 
prove,  by  placing  them  in  such  positions  in  life  as  would  drive  them 
to  reveal  what  was  in  their  heart,  viz.  whether  they  believed  in  the 
omnipotence,  love,  and  righteousness  of  God,  or  not. — Yer.  3.  The 
humiliation  in  the  desert  consisted  not  merely  in  the  fact  that  God 
let  the  people  hunger,  i.e.  be  in  want  of  bread  and  their  ordinary 
food,  but  also  in  the  fact  that  He  fed  them  with  manna,  which  was 
unknown  to  them  and  their  fathers  (cf.  Ex.  xvi.  16  sqq.).  Feeding 
with  manna  is  called  a  humiliation,  inasmuch  as  God  intended  to 


CHAP.  VIII.  1-6.  331 

show  to  the  people  through  this  food,  which  had  previously  been 
altogether  unknown  to  them,  that  man  does  not  live  by  bread  alone, 
that  the  power  to  sustain  life  does  not  rest  upon  bread  only  (Isa. 
xxxviii.  16;  Gen.  xxvii.  40),  or  belong  simply  to  it,  but  to  all  that 
goeth  forth  out  of  the  mouth  of  Jehovah.  That  which  "  pro- 
ceedeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  Jehovah'^  is  not  the  word  of  the  law,  as 
the  Rabbins  suppose,  but,  as  the  word  bh  (all,  every)  shows,  "  the 
word"  generally,  the  revealed  will  of  God  to  preserve  the  life  of 
man  in  whatever  way  (Schultz)  :  hence  all  means  designed  and 
appointed  by  the  Lord  for  the  sustenance  of  life.  In  this  sense 
Christ  quotes  these  words  in  reply  to  the  tempter  (Matt.  iv.  4),  not 
to  say  to  him.  The  Messiah  lives  not  by  (material)  bread  only, 
but  by  the  fulfilment  of  the  will  of  God  (  Usteri,  Ullmann)^  or  by 
trusting  in  the  sustaining  word  of  God  {Olshausen)  ;  but  that  He 
left  it  to  God  to  care  for  the  sustenance  of  His  life,  as  God  could 
sustain  His  life  in  extraordinary  ways,  even  without  the  common 
supplies  of  food,  by  the  power  of  His  almighty  word  and  will. — 
Ver.  4.  As  the  Lord  provided  for  their  nourishment,  so  did  He 
also  in  a  marvellous  way  for  the  clothing  of  His  people  during 
these  forty  years.  "  Thy  garment  did  not  fall  off  thee  through  age, 
and  thy  foot  did  not  swells  ri72  with  ip,  to  fall  off  from  age.  P^3 
only  occurs  again  in  Neh.  ix.  21,  where  this  passage  is  repeated. 
The  meaning  is  doubtful.  The  word  is  certainly  connected  with 
pV2  (dough),  and  probably  signifies  to  become  soft  or  to  swell,  al- 
though P^^  is  also  used  for  unleavened  dough.  The  Septuagint 
rendering  here  is  iTuXcodrjaav,  to  get  hard  skin ;  on  the  other 
hand,  in  Neh.  ix.  21,  we  find  the  rendering  vTroBrjfjLaTa  avrcov  ov 
Bieppdyrja-ap,  "  their  sandals  were  not  worn  out,"  from  the  parallel 
passage  in  Deut.  xxix.  5.  These  words  affirm  something  more  than 
"  clothes  and  shoes  never  failed  you,"  inasmuch  as  ye  always  had 
wool,  hides,  leather,  and  other  kinds  of  material  in  sufficient  quan- 
tities for  clothes  and  shoes,  as  not  only  J.  D.  Michaelis  and  others 
suppose,  but  Calmet,  and  even  Kurtz.  Knohel  is  quite  correct  in 
observing,  that  "  this  would  be  altogether  too  trivial  a  matter  by  the 
side  of  the  miraculous  supply  of  manna,  and  moreover  that  it  is 
not  involved  in  the  expression  itself,  which  rather  affirms  that  their 
clothes  did  not  wear  out  upon  them,  or  fall  in  tatters  from  their 
backs,  because  God  gave  them  a  miraculous  durability"  {Luther, 
Calvin,  'Baumgarten,  Schultz,  etc.).  At  the  same  time,  there  is  no 
necessity  to  follow  some  of  the  Rabbins  and  Justin  Martyr  (dial.  c. 
Tryph.  c.  131),  who  so  magnify  the  miracle  of  divine  providence, 


332  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

as  to  maintain  not  only  that  the  clothes  of  the  Israelites  did  not 
get  old,  but  that  as  the  younger  generation  grew  up  their  clothes 
also  grew  upon  their  backs,  like  the  shells  of  snails.  Nor  is  it  neces- 
sary to  shut  out  the  different  natural  resources  which  the  people 
had  at  their  command  for  providing  clothes  and  sandals,  any  more 
than  the  gift  of  manna  precluded  the  use  of  such  ordinary  pro- 
visions as  they  were  able  to  procure. — ^Ver.  5.  In  this  way  Jehovah 
humbled  and  tempted  His  people,  that  they  might  learn  in  their 
heart,  Le,  convince  themselves  by  experience,  that  their  God  was 
educating  them  as  a  father  does  his  son.  "IB^,  to  admonish,  chasten, 
educate;  like  iraiheveiv,  "It  includes  everything  belonging  to  a 
proper  education"  (^Calvin). — Ver.  6.  The  design  of  this  education 
was  to  train  them  to  keep  His  commandments,  that  they  might 
walk  in  His  ways  and  fear  Him  (chap.  vi.  24). 

Vers.  7—20.  The  Israelites  were  to  continue  mindful  of  this 
paternal  discipline  on  the  part  of  their  God,  when  the  Lord  should 
bring  them  into  the  good  land  of  Canaan.  This  land  Moses  de- 
scribes in  vers.  8,  9,  in  contrast  with  the  dry  unfruitful  desert,  as  a 
well-watered  and  very  fruitful  land,  which  yielded  abundance  of 
support  to  its  inhabitants ;  a  land  of  water-brooks,  fountains,  and 
floods  (niDinrij  see  Gen.  i.  2),  which  had  their  source  (took  their 
rise)  in  valleys  and  on  mountains ;  a  land  of  wheat  and  barley,  of 
the  vine,  fig,  and  pomegranate,  and  full  of  oil  and  honey  (see  at 
Ex.  iii.  8)  ;  lastly,  a  land  "  in  ivhich  thou  shall  not  eat  (support  thy- 
self) in  scarcity,  and  shalt  not  he  in  want  of  anything ;  a  land  whose 
stones  are  iron,  and  out  of  whose  mountains  thou  hewest  brass."  The 
stones  are  iron,  i.e.  ferruginous.  This  statement  is  confirmed  by 
modern  travellers,  although  the  Israelites  did  not  carry  on  mining, 
and  do  not  appear  to  have  obtained  either  iron  or  brass  from  their 
own  land.  The  iron  and  brass  which  David  collected  such  quan- 
tities for  the  building  of  the  temple  (1  Chron.  xxii.  3,  14),  he  pro- 
cured from  Betach  and  Berotai  (2  Sam.  viii.  8),  or  Tibchat  and 
Kun  (1  Chron.  xviii.  8),  towns  of  Hadadezer,  that  is  to  say,  from 
Syria.  According  to  Ezek.  xxvii.  19,  however,  the  Danites  brought 
iron-work  to  the  market  of  Tyre.  Not  only  do  the  springs  near 
Tiberias  contain  iron  (y.  Schubert,  R.  iii.  p.  239),  whilst  the  soil  at 
Hasbeya  and  the  springs  in  the  neighbourhood  are  also  strongly 
impregnated  with  iron  (Burckhardt,  Syrien,  p.  83),  but  in  the 
southern  mountains  as  well  there  are  probably  strata  of  iron  be- 
tween Jerusalem  and  Jericho  {Russegger,  R.  iii.  p.  250).  But 
Lebanon  especially  abounds  in  iron-stone ;  iron  mines  and  smelting 


CHAP.  VIII.  7-20.  333 

furnaces  being  found  there  in  many  places  ( Volney^  Travels ; 
Burchhardt,  p.  73  ;  Seetzen,  i.  j^p.  145,  187  sqq.,  237  sqq.).  The 
basalt  also,  which  occurs  in  great  masses  in  northern  Canaan  by 
the  side  of  the  limestone,  from  the  plain  of  Jezreel  onwards  {Robin- 
son, iii.  p.  313),  and  is  very  predominant  in  Bashan,  is  a  ferruginous 
stone.  Traces  of  extinct  copper-works  are  also  found  upon  Lebanon 
(Volney,  Travels;  Ritters  Erdkunde,  xvii.  p.  1063).— Vers.  10-18. 
But  if  the  Israelites  were  to  eat  there  and  be  satisfied,  i.e.  to  live  in 
the  midst  of  plenty,  they  were  to  beware  of  forgetting  their  God  ; 
that  when  their  prosperity — their  possessions,  in  the  form  of  lofty 
houses,  cattle,  gold  and  silver,  and  other  good  things — increased, 
their  heart  might  not  be  lifted  up,  i.e.  they  might  not  become  proud, 
and,  forgetting  their  deliverance  from  Egypt  and  their  miraculous 
preservation  and  guidance  in  the  desert,  ascribe  the  property  they 
had  acquired  to  their  own  strength  and  the  work  of  their  own  hands. 
To  keep  the  people  from  this  danger  of  forgetting  God,  which  fol- 
lows so  easily  from  the  pride  of  wealth,  Moses  once  more  enumerates 
in  vers.  146-16  the  manifestations  of  divine  grace,  their  deliverance 
from  Egypt  the  slave-house,  their  being  led  through  the  great  and 
terrible  desert,  whose  terrors  he  depicts  by  mentioning  a  series  of 
noxious  and  even  fatal  things,  such  as  snakes,  burning  snakes 
(saraph,  see  at  Num.  xxi.  6),  scorpions,  and  the  thirsty  land  where 
there  was  no  water.  The  words  from  tJ'nj  onwards,  are  attached 
rhetorically  to  what  precedes  by  simple  apposition,  without  any 
logically  connecting  particle ;  though  it  will  not  do  to  overlook  en- 
tirely the  rhetorical  form  of  the  enumeration,  and  supply  the  pre- 
position ^  before  C'm  and  the  words  which  follow,  to  say  nothing 
of  the  fact  that  it  would  be  quite  out  of  character  before  these 
nouns  in  the  singular,  as  a  whole  people  could  not  go  through  one 
serpent,  etc.  In  this  parched  land  the  Lord  brought  the  people 
water  out  of  the  flinty  rock,  the  hardest  stone,  and  fed  them  with 
manna,  to  humble  them  and  tempt  them  (cf.  ver.  2),  in  order  (this 
was  the  ultimate  intention  of  all  the  humiliation  and  trial)  "  to  do 
thee  good  at  thy  latter  end"  The  "  latter  end"  of  any  one  is  "  the 
time  which  follows  some  distinct  point  in  his  life,  particularly  an 
important  epoch-making  point,  and  which  may  be  regarded  as  the 
end  by  contrast,  the  time  before  that  epoch  being  considered  as 
the  beginning"  (SchuUz).  In  this  instance  Moses  refers  to  the 
period  of  their  life  in  Canaan,  in  contrast  with  which  the  period  of 
their  sojourn  in  Egypt  and  their  wandering  in  the  desert  is  regarded 
as  the  beginning;  consequently  the  expression  does  not  relate  to 


334  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

death  as  the  end  of  life,  as  in  Num.  xxiii.  10,  although  this  allusion 
is  not  to  be  altogether  excluded,  as  a  blessed  death  is  only  the  com- 
pletion of  a  blessed  life. — Like  all  the  guidance  of  Israel  by  the 
Lord,  what  is  stated  here  is  applicable  to  all  believers.  It  is  through 
humiliations  and  trials  that  the  Lord  leads  His  people  to  blessedness. 
Through  the  desert  of  tribulation,  anxiety,  distress,  and  merciful 
interposition,  He  conducts  them  to  Canaan,  into  the  land  of  rest, 
where  they  are  refreshed  and  satisfied  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  the 
blessings  of  His  grace  and  salvation  ;  but  those  alone  who  continue 
humble,  not  attributing  the  good  fortune  and  prosperity  to  which 
they  attain  at  last,  to  their  own  exertion,  strength,  perseverance, 
and  wisdom,  but  gratefully  enjoying  this  good  as  a  gift  of  the  grace 
of  God.  P^n  ne^y^  to  create  property,  to  prosper  in  wealth  (as  in 
Num.  xxiv.  18).  God  gave  strength  for  this  (ver.  18),  not  because 
of  Israel's  merit  and  worthiness,  but  to  fulfil  His  promises  which 
He  had  made  on  oath  to  the  patriarchs.  ^'  As  this  day"  as  was 
quite  evident  then,  when  the  establishment  of  the  covenant  had 
already  commenced,  and  Israel  had  come  through  the  desert  to  the 
border  of  Canaan  (see  chap.  iv.  20). — ^Vers.  19,  20.  To  strengthen 
his  admonition,  Moses  pointed  again  in  conclusion,  as  he  had  already 
done  in  chap.  vi.  14  (cf.  chap.  iv.  25  sqq.),  to  the  destruction  which 
would  come  upon  Israel  through  apostasy  from  its  God. 

Warning  against  Self-righteousness,  founded  upon  the  recital  of 
their  -previous  Sins. — Chap,  ix.-x.  11. 

Besides  the  more  vulgar  pride  which  entirely  forgets  God,  an 
attributes  success  and  prosperity  to  its  own  power  and  exertion,  there 
is  one  of  a  more  refined  character,  which  very  easily  spreads — namely, 
pride  which  acknowledges  the  blessings  of  God ;  but  instead  of 
receiving  them  gratefully,  as  unmerited  gifts  of  the  grace  of  the 
Lord,  sees  in  them  nothing  but  proofs  of  its  own  righteousness  and 
virtue.  Moses  therefore  warned  the  Israelites  more  particularly  of 
this  dangerous  enemy  of  the  soul,  by  first  of  all  declaring  without 
reserve,  that  the  Lord  was  not  about  to  give  them  Canaan  because 
of  their  own  righteousness,  but  that  He  would  exterminate  the 
Canaanites  for  their  own  wickedness  (vers.  1-6) ;  and  then  showing 
them  for  their  humiliation,  by  proofs  drawn  from  the  immediate 
past,  how  they  had  brought  upon  themselves  the  anger  of  the  Lord, 
by  their  apostasy  and  rebellion  against  their  God,  directly  after  the 
conclusion  of  the  covenant  at  Sinai ;  and  that  in  such  a  way,  that  it 
was  only  by  his  earnest  intercession  that  he  had  been  able  to  prevent 


1 


CHAP.  IX.  1-6.  335 

the  destruction  of  the  people  (vers.  7-24),  and  to  secure  a  further 
renewal  of  the  pledges  of  the  covenant  (ver.  25-chap.  x.  11). 

Yers.  1-6.  Warning  against  a  conceit  of  righteousness,  with 
the  occasion  for  the  warning.  As  the  Israelites  were  now  about  to 
cross  over  the  Jordan  ("  this  day,"  to  indicate  that  the  time  was 
close  at  hand),  to  take  possession  of  nations  that  were  superior  to 
them  in  size  and  strength  (the  tribes  of  Canaan  mentioned  in  chap, 
vii.  1),  and  great  fortified  cities  reaching  to  the  heavens  (cf.  chap, 
i.  28),  namely,  the  great  and  tall  nation  of  the  Enakites  (chap.  i.  28), 
before  which,  as  was  well  known,  no  one  could  stand  (2?f!n''},  as  in 
chap.  vii.  24)  ;  and  as  they  also  knew  that  Jehovah  their  God  was 
going  before  them  to  destroy  and  humble  these  nations,  they  were 
not  to  say  in  their  heart,  when  this  was  done,  For  my  righteousness 
Jehovah  hath  brought  me  in  to  possess  this  land.  In  ver.  3,  ^V'^l) 
Di^n  is  not  to  be  taken  in  an  imperative  sense,  but  as  expressive  of 
the  actual  fact,  and  corresponding  to  ver.  1,  "  thou  art  to  pass." 
Israel  now  knew  for  certain — namely,  by  the  fact,  which  spoke  so 
powerfully,  of  its  having  been  successful  against  foes  which  it  could 
never  have  conquered  by  itself,  especially  against  Sihon  and  Og — 
that  the  Lord  was  going  before  it,  as  the  leader  and  captain  of  His 
people  (^Schultz :  see  chap.  i.  30).  The  threefold  repetition  of  t^^n 
in  ver.  3.  is  peculiarly  emphatic.  "  A  consuming  fire :"  as  in  chap, 
iv.  24.  CiTPr.  ^'"^  is  more  particularly  defined  by  '1i1  UV'^y  fc?ini, 
which  follows :  not,  however,  as  implying  that  ^"'OK^'n  does  not  sig- 
nify complete  destruction  in  this  passage,  but  rather  as  explaining 
how  the  destruction  would  take  place.  Jehovah  would  destroy  the 
Canaanites,  by  bringing  them  down,  humbling  them  before  Israel, 
so  that  they  would  be  able  to  drive  them  out  and  destroy  them 
quickly.  "  "»np,  quickly,  is  no  more  opposed  to  chap.  vii.  22,  '  thou 
mayest  not  destroy  them  quickly,'  than  God's  not  delaying  to 
requite  (chap.  vii.  10)  is  opposed  to  His  long-suffering"  (^Schultz). 
So  far  as  the  almighty  assistance  of  God  was  concerned,  the  Israel- 
ites would  quickly  overthrow  the  Canaanites ;  but  for  the  sake  of 
the  well-being  of  Israel,  the  destruction  would  only  take  place  by 
degrees.  "  As  Jehovah  hath  said  unto  thee :"  viz.  Ex.  xxiii.  23,  27 
sqq.,  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  conflict,  chap.  ii.  24  sqq. — Ver.  4. 
When  therefore  Jehovah  thrust  out  these  nations  before  them  (^\}, 
as  in  chap.  vi.  19),  the  Israelites  were  not  to  say  within  themselves, 
"  By  (for,  on  account  of)  my  righteousness  Jehovah  hath  brought  me 
(led  me  hither)  to  possess  this  land,"  The  following  word,  HV^ll, 
is  adversative  :  "  hut  because  of  the  wickedness  of  these  nations,"  etc. 


336  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

— To  impress  this  truth  deeply  upon  the  people,  Moses  repeats  the 
thought  once  more  in  ver.  5.  At  the  same  time  he  mentions,  in 
addition  to  righteousness,  straightness  or  uprightness  of  heart,  to 
indicate  briefly  that  outward  works  do  not  constitute  true  righteous- 
ness, but  that  an  upright  state  of  heart  is  indispensable,  and  then 
enters  more  fully  into  the  positive  reasons.  The  wickedness  of  the 
Canaanites  was  no  doubt  a  sufficient  reason  for  destroying  them^ 
but  not  for  giving  their  land  to  the  people  of  Israel,  since  they  could 
lay  no  claim  to  it  on  account  of  their  own  righteousness.  The  reason 
for  giving  Canaan  to  the  Israelites  was  simply  the  promise  of  God, 
the  word  which  the  Lord  had  spoken  to  the  patriarchs  on  oath  (cf. 
chap.  vii.  8),  and  therefore  nothing  but  the  free  grace  of  God, — not 
any  merit  on  the  part  of  the  Israelites  who  w^ere  then  living,  for 
they  were  a  people  "  of  a  hard  neck,"  Le,  a  stubborn,  untractable 
generation.  With  these  words,  which  the  Lord  Himself  had  ap- 
plied to  Israel  in  Ex.  xxxii.  9,  xxxiii.  3,  5,  Moses  prepares  the  way 
for  passing  to  the  reasons  for  his  warning  against  self-righteous 
pride,  namely,  the  grievous  sins  of  the  Israelites  against  the  Lord. 

Vers.  7-24.  He  reminded  the  people  how  they  had  provoked  the 
Lord  in  the  desert,  and  had  shown  themselves  rebellious  against 
God,  from  the  day  of  their  departure  from  Egypt  till  their  arrival 
in  the  steppes  of  Moab.  ^^^"^^f,  for  ^f^,^  is  the  object  to  nsK'n 
(Ewald,  §  333,  a.)  :  "  Jiow  thou  hast  provoked."  "TJ^"?,  generally 
vrith  ^3"nt<t  (cf.  chap.  i.  26),  to  be  rebellious  against  the  command- 
ment of  the  Lord :  here  w^ith  DV,  construed  with  a  person,  to  deal 
rebelliously  with  God,  to  act  rebelliously  in  relation  to  Him  (cf. 
chap.  xxxi.  27).  The  words,  ^'  from  the  day  that  thou  earnest  out,^ 
etc.,  are  not  to  be  pressed.  It  is  to  be  observed,  however,  that 
the  rebellion  against  the  guidance  of  God  commenced  before  they 
passed  through  the  Red  Sea  (Ex.  xiv.  11).  This  general  statement 
Moses  then  followed  up  with  facts,  first  of  all  describing  the  worship 
of  the  calf  at  Horeb,  according  to  its  leading  features  (vers.  8-21), 
and  then  briefly  pointing  to  the  other  rebellions  of  the  people  in 
the  desert  (vers.  22,  23). — Ver.  8.  "  And  indeed  even  in  Horeb  ye 
'provoked  Jehovah  to  wrath."  By  the  vav  explic.  this  sin  is  brought 
into  prominence,  as  having  been  a  specially  grievous  one.  It  was 
so  because  of  the  circumstances  under  which  it  was  committed. — 
Vers.  9—12.  When  Moses  went  up  the  mountain,  and  stayed  there 
forty  days,  entirely  occupied  with  the  holiest  things,  so  that  he 
neither  ate  nor  drank,  having  gone  up  to  receive  the  tables  of  the 
law,  upon  which  the  words  were  written  with  the  finger  of  God, 


I 


CHAP.  IX.  7-24.  337 

just  as  the  Lord  had  spoken  them  dh'ectly  to  the  people  out  of  the 
midst  of  the  fire, — at  a  time,  therefore,  when  the  IsraeHtes  should 
also  have  been  meditating  deeply  upon  the  words  of  the  Lord  which 
they  had  but  just  heard, — they  acted  so  corruptly,  as  to  depart  at 
once  from  the  way  that  had  been  pomted  out,  and  make  themselves 
a  molten  image  (comp.  Ex.  xxxi.  18-xxxii.  6,  with  chaps,  xxiv.  12— 
xxxi.  17).  "  The  day  of  the  assembly ^^  i,e,  the  day  on  which  Moses 
gathered  the  people  together  before  God  (chap.  iv.  10),  calling  them 
out  of  the  camp,  and  bringing  them  to  the  Lord  to  the  foot  of 
Sinai  (Ex.  xix.  17).  The  construction  of  the  sentence  is  this  :  the 
apodosis  to  "  when  I  was  gone  up^^  commences  with  "  the  Lord 
delivered  unto  we,"  in  ver.  10 ;  and  the  clause,  "  then  I  ahode^^  etc., 
in  ver.  9,  is  a  parenthesis. — The  words  of  God  in  vers.  12-14  are 
taken  almost  word  for  word  from  Ex.  xxxii.  7—10.  ^^J}  (ver.  14), 
the  imperative  Hiphil  of  nan,  desist  from  me,  that  I  may  destroy 
them,  for  7  '^^'^^'^,  in  Ex.  xxxii.  10.  But  notwithstanding  the  apos- 
tasy of  the  people,  the  Lord  gave  Moses  the  tables  of  the  covenant, 
not  only  that  they  might  be  a  testimony  of  His  holiness  before  the 
faithless  nation,  but  still  more  as  a  testimony  that,  in  spite  of  His 
resolution  to  destroy  the  rebellious  nation,  without  leaving  a  trace 
behind,  He  would  still  uphold  His  covenant,  and  make  of  Moses  a 
greater  people.  There  is  nothing  at  all  to  favour  the  opinion,  that 
handing  over  the  tables  (ver.  11)  was  the  first  beginning  of  the 
manifestations  of  divine  wrath  {Schultz) ;  and  this  is  also  at  variance 
with  the  preterite,  jH^,  in  ver.  11,  from  which  it  is  very  evident  that 
the  Lord  had  already  given  the  tables  to  Moses,  when  He  com- 
manded him  to  go  down  quickly,  not  only  to  declare  to  the  people 
the  holiness  of  God,  but  to  stop  the  apostasy,  and  byliis  mediatorial 
intervention  to  avert  from  the  people  the  execution  of  the  divine 
purpose.  It  is  true,  that  when  Moses  came  down  and  saw  the 
idolatrous  conduct  of  the  people,  he  threw  the  two  tables  from  his 
hands,  and  broke  them  in  pieces  before  the  eyes  of  the  people  (vers. 
15-17 ;  comp.  with  Ex.  xxxii.  15-19),  as  a  practical  declaration  that 
the  covenant  of  the  Lord  was  broken  by  their  apostasy.  But  this 
act  of  Moses  furnishes  no  proof  that  the  Lord  had  given  him  the 
tables  to  declare  His  holy  wrath  in  the  sight  of  the  people.  And 
even  if  the  tables  of  the  covenant  were  "  in  a  certain  sense  the 
indictments  in  Moses'  hands,  accusing  them  of  a  capital  crime" 
{Schuhz),  this  was  not  the  purpose  for  which  God  had  given  them 
to  him.  For  if  it  had  been,  Moses  would  not  have  broken  them  in 
pieces,  destroying,  as  it  were,  the  indictments  themselves,  before 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  Y 


338  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  people  had  been  tried.  Moses  passed  over  the  fact,  that  even 
before  coming  down  from  the  mountain  he  endeavoured  to  mitigate 
the  wrath  of  the  Lord  by  his  intercession  (Ex.  xxxii.  11-14),  and 
simply  mentioned  (in  vers.  15-17)  how,  as  soon  as  he  came  down, 
he  charged  the  people  with  their  great  sin ;  and  then,  in  vers.  18, 19, 
how  he  spent  another  forty  days  upon  the  mountain  fasting  before 
God,  on  account  of  this  sin,  until  he  had  averted  the  destructive 
wrath  of  the  Lord  from  Israel,  through  his  earnest  intercession. 
The  forty  days  that  Moses  spent  upon  the  mountain,  "  as  at  the 
first,"  in  prayer  before  the  Lord,  are  the  days  mentioned  in  Ex. 
xxxiv.  28  as  having  been  passed  upon  Sinai  for  the  perfect  restora- 
tion of  the  covenant,  and  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  the  second 
tables  (cf.  chap.  x.  1  sqq.). — Ver.  20.  It  was  not  from  the  people 
only,  but  from  Aaron  also,  that  Moses  averted  the  wrath  of  God 
through  his  intercession,  when  it  was  about  to  destroy  him.  In  the 
historical  account  in  Ex.  xxxii.,  there  is  no  special  reference  to  this 
intercession,  as  it  is  included  in  the  intercession  for  the  whole  nation. 
On  the  present  occasion,  however,  Moses  gave  especial  prominence 
to  this  particular  feature,  not  only  that  he  might  make  the  people 
thoroughly  aware  that  at  that  time  Israel  could  not  even  boast  of 
the  righteousness  of  its  eminent  men  (cf.  Isa.  xliii.  27),  but  also  to 
bring  out  the  fact,  which  is  described  still  more  fully  in  chap.  x.  6 
sqq.,  that  Aaron's  investiture  with  the  priesthood,  and  the  mainte- 
nance of  this  institution,  was  purely  a  work  of  divine  grace.  It  is 
true  that  at  that  time  Aaron  was  not  yet  high  priest ;  but  he  had 
been  placed  at  the  head  of  the  nation  in  connection  with  Hur,  as 
the  representative  of  Moses  (Ex.  xxiv.  14),  and  was  already  desig- 
nated by  God  for  the  high-priesthood  (Ex.  xxviii.  1).  The  fact, 
however,  that  Aaron  had  drawn  upon  himself  the  wrath  of  God  in 
a  very  high  degree,  was  intimated  plainly  enough  in  what  Moses 
told  him  in  Ex.  xxxii.  21. — In  ver.  21,  Moses  mentions  again  how 
he  destroyed  that  manifested  sin  of  the  nation,  namely,  the  molten 
calf  (see  at  Ex.  xxxii.  20). — Vers.  22-24.  And  it  was  not  on  this 
occasion  only,  viz.  at  Horeb,  that  Israel  aroused  the  anger  of  the 
Lord  its  God  by  its  sin,  but  it  did  so  again  and  again  at  other 
places  :  at  Tabeerah,  by  discontent  at  the  guidance  of  God  (Num. 
xi.  1-3)  ;  at  Massah,  by  murmuring  on  account  of  the  want  of 
water  (Ex.  xvii.  1  sqq.)  ;  at  the  graves  of  lust,  by  longing  for  flesh 
(Num.  xi.  4  sqq.)  ;  and  at  Kadesh-Barnea  by  unbelief,  of  which 
they  had  already  been  reminded  at  chap.  i.  26  sqq.  The  list  is  not 
arranged  chronologically,  but  advances  gradually  from  the  smaller 


CHAP.  IX.  25-29.  339 

to  the  more  serious  forms  of  guilt.  For  Moses  was  seeking  to 
sharpen  the  consciences  of  the  people,  and  to  impress  upon  them 
the  fact  that  they  had  been  rebellious  against  the  Lord  (see  at 
ver.  7)  from  the  very  beginning,  "  from  the  day  that  I  knew  you." 
Vers.  25-29.  After  vindicating  in  this  way  the  thought  ex- 
pressed in  ver.  7,  by  enumerating  the  principal  rebellions  of  the 
people  against  their  God,  Moses  returns  in  vers.  25  sqq.  to  the 
apostasy  at  Sinai,  for  the  purpose  of  showing  still  further  how 
Israel  had  no  righteousness  or  ground  for  boasting  before  God,  and 
owed  its  preservation,  with  all  the  saving  blessings  of  the  covenant, 
solely  to  the  mercy  of  God  and  His  covenant  faithfulness.  To  this 
end  he  repeats  in  vers.  26-29  the  essential  points  in  his  intercession 
for  the  people  after  their  sin  at  Sinai,  and  then  proceeds  to  explain 
still  further,  in  chap.  x.  1—11,  how  the  Lord  had  not  only  renewed 
the  tables  of  the  covenant  in  consequence  of  this  intercession  (vers. 
1-5),  but  had  also  established  the  gracious  institution  of  the  priest- 
hood for  the  time  to  come  by  appointing  Eleazar  in  Aaron's  stead 
as  soon  as  his  father  died,  and  setting  apart  the  tribe  of  Levi  to 
carry  the  ark  of  the  covenant  and  attend  to  the  holy  service,  and 
had  commanded  them  to  continue  their  march  to  Canaan,  and  take 
possession  of  the  land  promised  to  the  fathers  (vers.  6-11).  With 
the  words  "  thus  I  fell  down,"  in  ver.  25,  Moses  returns  to  the  in- 
tercession already  briefly  mentioned  in  ver.  18,  and  recalls  to  the 
recollection  of  the  people  the  essential  features  of  his  plea  at  that 
time.  For  the  words  "  the  forty  days  and  nights  that  I  fell  dowrty^ 
see  at  chap.  i.  46.  The  substance  of  the  intercession  in  vers.  26-29 
is  essentially  the  same  as  that  in  Ex.  xxxii.  11-13;  but  given  with 
such  freedom  as  any  other  than  Moses  would  hardly  have  allowed 
himself  {Schultz),  and  in  such  a  manner  as  to  bring  it  into  the 
most  obvious  relation  to  the  words  of  God  in  vers.  12, 13.  rin*^Pi-?K, 
"  Destroy  not  Thy  people  and  Thine  inheritance,^^  says  Moses,  with 
reference  to  the  words  of  the  Lord  to  him :  "  thy  people  have  cor- 
o'upted  themselves "  (ver.  12).  Israel  was  not  Moses'  nation,  but 
the  nation  and  inheritance  of  Jehovah ;  it  was  not  Moses,  but 
Jehovah,  who  had  brought  it  out  of  Egypt.  True,  the  people  were 
stiff  necked  (cf.  ver.  13) ;  but  let  the  Lord  remember  the  fathers, 
the  oath  given  to  Abraham,  which  is  expressly  mentioned  in  Ex. 
xxxii.  13  (see  at  chap.  vii.  8),  and  not  turn  to  the  stiff neckedness 
of  the  people  (^^\>  equivalent  to  K}^  HK^p^  vers.  13  and  6),  and  to 
their  wickedness  and  sin  {i.e.  not  regard  them  and  punish  them). 
The  honour  of  the  Lord  before  the  nations  was  concerned  in  this 


340  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


I 


(ver.  28).  The  land  whence  Israel  came  out  ("  the  land  "  =  the 
people  of  the  land,  as  in  Gen.  x.  25,  etc.,  viz.  the  Egyptians  :  the 
word  is  construed  as  a  collective  with  a  plural  verb)  must  not  have  ^g 
occasion  to  say,  that  Jehovah  had  not  led  His  people  into  the  pro-  fli 
mised  land  from  incapacity  or  hatred.  Typ\  "'pnp  recalls  Num.  xiv.  16. 
Just  as  "  inability  "  would  be  opposed  to  the  nature  of  the  absolute 
God,  so  "  hatred  "  would  be  opposed  to  the  choice  of  Israel  as  the 
inheritance  of  Jehovah,  which  He  had  brought  out  of  Egypt  by 
His  divine  and  almighty  power  (cf.  Ex.  vi.  6). 

Chap.  X.  1—11.  In  vers.  1-5  Moses  briefly  relates  the  success 
of  his  earnest  intercession.  ^' At  that  time^^  of  his  intercession,  .j 
God  commanded  him  to  hew  out  new  tables,  and  prepare  an  ark  in 
which  to  keep  them  (cf.  Ex.  xxxiv.  1  sqq.).  Here  again  Moses 
links  together  such  things  as  were  substantially  connected,  without 
strictly  confining  himself  to  the  chronological  order,  which  was 
already  well  known  from  the  historical  account,  inasmuch  as  this 
was  not  required  by  the  general  object  of  his  address.  God  had 
already  given  directions  for  the  preparation  of  the  ark  of  the  cove- 
nant, before  the  apostasy  of  the  nation  (Ex.  xxv.  10  sqq.) ;  but 
it  was  not  made  till  after  the  tabernacle  had  been  built,  and  the 
tables  were  only  deposited  in  the  ark  when  the  tabernacle  was  con- 
secrated (Ex.  xl.  20). — Vers.  6  and  7.  And  the  Israelites  owed  to  . 
the  grace  of  their  God,  which  was  turned  towards  them  once  more,  9 1 
through  the  intercession  of  Moses,  not  only  the  restoration  of  the 
tables  of  the  covenant  as  a  pledge  that  the  covenant  itself  was 
restored,  but  also  the  institution  and  maintenance  of  the  high- 
priesthood  and  priesthood  generally  for  the  purpose  of  mediation 
between  them  and  the  Lord.^     Moses  reminds  the  people  of  this 

^  Even  Clericus  pointed  out  this  connection,  and  paraphrased  vers.  6  and  7 
as  follows:  "But  when,  as  I  have  said,  God  forgave  the  Hebrew  people,  He 
pardoned  my  brother  Aaron  also,  who  did  not  die  till  the  fortieth  year  after  we 
had  come  out  of  Egypt,  and  when  we  were  coming  round  the  borders  of  the 
Edomites  to  come  hither.  God  also  showed  that  He  was  reconciled  towards 
him  by  conferring  the  priesthood  upon  him,  which  is  now  borne  by  his  son 
Eleazar  according  to  the  will  of  God."  Clericus  has  also  correctly  brought  out 
the  fact  that  Moses  referred  to  what  he  had  stated  in  chap.  ix.  20  as  to  the 
wrath  of  God  against  Aaron  and  his  intercession  on  his  behalf,  or  rather  that 
he  mentioned  his  intercession  on  behalf  of  Aaron  in  that  passage,  because  he 
intended  to  call  more  particular  attention  to  the  successful  result  of  it  in  this. 
Hengstenherg  (Dissertations,  vol.  ii.  pp.  351-2)  has  since  pointed  out  briefly,  but 
very  conclusively,  the  connection  of  thought  between  vers.  6,  7,  and  what  goes 
before  and  follows  after.  "  Moses,"  he  says,  "  points  out  to  the  people  how  the 
Lord  had  continued  unchangeable  in  His  mercy  notwithstanding  all  their  sins. 


I 

II 


CHAP.  X.  1-11.  341 

gracious  gift  on  the  part  of  their  God,  by  recalling  to  their  memory 
the  time  when  Aaron  died  and  his  son  Eleazar  was  invested  with 
the  high-priesthood  in  his  stead.  That  he  may  transport  his 
hearers  the  more  distinctly  to  the  period  in  question,  he  lets  the 
history  itself  speak,  and  quotes  from  the  account  of  their  journeys 
the  passage  which  supplied  the  practical  proof  of  what  he  desires 
to  say.  Instead  of  saying :  And  the  high-priesthood  also,  with 
which  Aaron  was  invested  by  the  grace  of  God  notwithstanding 
his  sin  at  Sinai,  the  Lord  has  still  preserved  to  you;  for  when 
Aaron  died.  He  invested  his  son  with  the  same  honour,^  and  also 
directed  you  to  continue  your  journey, — he  proceeds  in  the  following 
historical  style  :  "  And  the  children  of  Israel  took  their  journey  from 
the  wells  of  the  sons  of  JaaJcan  to  Mosera :  there  Aaron  died,  and 
there  he  was  buried ;  and  Eleazar  his  son  became  priest  in  his  stead. 
And  from  thence  they  journeyed  unto  Gudgodah,  and  from  Gudgodah 
to  Jotbath,  a  land  of  icater-brooks."  The  allusion  to  these  marches, 
together  with  the  events  which  had  taken  place  at  Mosera,  taught 
in  very  few  words  "  not  only  that  Aaron  was  forgiven  at  the  inter- 
cession of  Moses,  and  even  honoured  with  the  high-priesthood,  the 
medium  of  grace  and  blessing  to  the  people  of  God  (e.g.  at  the 
wells  of  Bene-Jaakan)  until  the  time  of  his  death ;  but  also  that 
through  this  same  intercession  the  high-priesthood  was  maintained 
in  perpetuity,  so  that  when  Aaron  had  to  die  in  the  wilderness  in 
consequence  of  a  fresh  sin  (Num.  xx.  12),  it  continued  notwith- 

Although  they  had  rendered  themselves  unworthy  of  such  goodness  by  their 
worship  of  the  calf,  He  gave  them  the  ark  of  the  covenant  with  the  new  tables 
of  the  law  in  it  (chap.  x.  1-5).  He  followed  up  this  gift  of  His  grace  by 
instituting  the  high-priesthood,  and  when  Aaron  died  He  caused  it  to  be  trans- 
ferred to  his  son  Eleazar  (vers.  6,  7).  He  set  apart  the  tribe  of  Levi  to  serve 
Him  and  bless  the  people  in  His  name,  and  thus  to  be  the  mediators  of  His 
mercy  (vers.  8,  9).  In  short,  He  omitted  nothing  that  was  requisite  to  place 
Israel  in  full  possession  of  the  dignity  of  a  people  of  God."  There  is  no  ground 
for  regarding  vers.  6,  7,  as  a  gloss,  as  Capellus,  Dathe^  and  Rosenmiiller  do,  or 
vers.  6-9  as  "  an  interpolation  of  a  historical  statement  concerning  the  bearers 
of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  and  the  holy  persons  generally,  which  has  no  con- 
nection with  Moses'  address,"  as  Knohel  maintains.  The  want  of  any  formal 
connection  is  quite  in  keeping  with  the  spirit  of  simplicity  which  characterizes 
the  early  Hebrew  diction  and  historical  writings.  "  The  style  of  the  Hebrews 
is  not  to  be  tried  by  the  rules  of  rhetoricians"  (Clericus). 

^  "  In  the  death  of  Aaron  they  might  discern  the  punishment  of  their 
rebellion.  But  the  fact  that  Eleazar  was  appointed  in  his  place,  was  a  sign  of 
the  paternal  grace  of  God,  who  did  not  suffer  them  to  be .  forsaken  on  that 
account"  (Calvin). 


342  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

standing,  and  by  no  means  diminished  in  strength,  as  might  have 
been  feared,  since  it  led  the  way  from  the  wells  to  water-brooks, 
helped  on  the  journey  to  Canaan,  which  was  now  the  object  of 
their  immediate  aim,  and  still  sustained  their  courage  and  their 
faith "  (Schultz).  The  earlier  commentators  observed  the  inward 
connection  between  the  continuation  of  the  high-priesthood  and  the 
water-brooks.  J.  Gerhard,  for  example,  observes  :  "  God  generally 
associates  material  blessings  with  spiritual ;  as  long  as  the  ministry 
of  the  word  and  the  observance  of  divine  worship  flourish  among 
us,  God  will  also  provide  for  our  temporal  necessities."  On  the 
places  mentioned,  see  pp.  244—5. 

In  ver.  8,  Moses  returns  to  the  form  of  an  address  again,  and 
refers  to  the  separation  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  for  the  holy  service,  as 
a  manifestation  of  mercy  on  the  part  of  the  Lord  towards  Israel. 
The  expression  "  at  that  time  "  is  not  to  be  understood  as  relating 
to  the  time  of  Aaron's  death  in  the  fortieth  year  of  the  march,  in 
which  Knohel  finds  a  contradiction  to  the  other  books.  It  refers 
quite  generally,  as  in  chap.  ix.  20  and  x.  1,  to  the  time  of  which 
Moses  is  speaking  here,  viz.  the  time  when  the  covenant  was  re- 
stored at  Sinai.  The  appointment  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  for  service 
at  the  sanctuary  took  place  in  connection  with  the  election  of 
Aaron  and  his  sons  to  the  priesthood  (Ex.  xxviii.  and  xxix.), 
although  their  call  to  this  service,  instead  of  the  first-born  of  Israel, 
was  not  carried  out  till  the  numbering  and  mustering  of  the  people 
(Num.  i.  49  sqq.,  iv.  17  sqq.,  viii.  6  sqq.).  Moses  is  speaking  here 
of  the  election  of  the  whole  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  including  the 
priests  (Aaron  and  his  sons),  as  is  very  evident  from  the  account 
of  their  service.  It  is  true  that  the  carrying  of  the  ark  upon  the 
march  through  the  desert  was  the  business  of  the  (non-priestly) 
Levites,  viz.  the  Kohathites  (Num.  iv.  4  sqq.)  ;  but  on  solemn 
occasions  the  priests  had  to  carry  it  (cf.  Josh.  iii.  3,  6,  8,  vi.  6 ; 
1  Kings  viii.  3  sqq.).  "  Standing  before  the  Lord,  to  serve  Him, 
and  to  bless  in  His  name,"  was  exclusively  the  business  of  the 
priests  (cf.  chap,  xviii.  5,  xxi.  5,  and  Num.  vi.  23  sqq.),  whereas 
the  Levites  were  only  assistants  of  the  priests  in  their  service 
(see  at  chap,  xviii.  7).  This  tribe  therefore  received  no  share 
and  possession  with  the  other  tribes,  as  was  already  laid  down  in 
Num.  xviii.  20  with  reference  to  the  priests,  and  in  ver.  24  with 
regard  to  all  the  Levites;  to  which  passages  the  words  "as  the 
Lord  thy  God  promised  him"  refer. — Lastly,  in  vers.  10,  11,  Moses 
sums  up  the  result  of  his  intercession  in  the  words,  ''And  I  stood 


CHAP.  X.  12-15.  343 

upon  the  mount  as  the  first  days,  forty  days  (a  resumption  of  chap. 
ix.  18  and  2b)  ;  and  the  Lord  hearkened  to  me  this  time  also  (word 
for  word,  as  in  chap.  ix.  19).  Jehovah  would  not  destroy  thee 
(Israel)."  Therefore  He  commanded  Moses  to  arise  to  depart 
before  the  people,  i.e,  as  leader  of  the  people  to  command  and 
superintend  their  removal  and  march.  In  form,  this  command  is 
connected  with  Ex.  xxxiv.  1 ;  but  Moses  refers  here  not  only  to 
that  word  of  the  Lord  with  the  limitation  added  there  in  ver.  2, 
but  to  the  ultimate,  full,  and  unconditional  assurance  of  God,  in 
which  the  Lord  Himself  promised  to  go  with  His  people  and  bring 
them  to  Canaan  (Ex.  xxxiv.  14  sqq.). 

Admonition  to  fear  and  love  God,  The  Blessing  or  Curse  conse- 
quent upon  the  Fulfilment  or  Transgression  of  the  Law» — Chap. 
X.  12-xi.  32. 

Vers.  12-15.  The  proof  that  Israel  had  no  righteousness  before 
God  is  followed  on  the  positive  side  by  an  expansion  of  the  main 
law  laid  down  in  chap.  vi.  4  sqq.,  to  love  God  with  all  the  heart, 
which  is  introduced  by  the  words,  "  and  now  Israel,"  sc.  now  that 
thou  hast  everything  without  desert  or  worthiness,  purely  from  for- 
giving grace.  "  What  doth  the  Lord  thy  God  require  of  thee?" 
Nothing  further  than  that  thou  fearest  Him,  "  to  walk  in  all  His 
ways,  and  to  love  Him,  and  to  serve  Him  with  all  the  heart  and  all 
the  soul."  D^?  ''3,  unless,  or  except  that,  presupposes  a  negative 
clause  (cf.  Gen.  xxxix.  9),  which  is  implied  here  in  the  previous 
question,  or  else  to  be  supplied  as  the  answer.  The  demand  for 
fear,  love,  and  reverence  towards  the  Lord,  is  no  doubt  very  hard 
for  the  natural  man  to  fulfil,  and  all  the  harder  the  deeper  it  goes 
into  the  heart ;  but  after  such  manifestations  of  the  love  and  grace 
of  God,  it  only  follows  as  a  matter  of  course.  "  Fear,  love,  and 
obedience  would  naturally  have  taken  root  of  themselves  within  the 
heart,  if  man  had  not  corrupted  his  own  heart."  Love,  which  is 
the  only  thing  demanded  in  chap.  vi.  5,  is  here  preceded  by  fear, 
which  is  the  only  thing  mentioned  in  chap.  v.  26  and  vi.  24.^  The 
fear  of  the  Lord,  which  springs  from  the  knowledge  of  one's  own 
unholiness  in  the  presence  of  the  holy  God,  ought  to  form  the  one 
leading  emotion  in  the  heart  prompting  to  walk  in  all  the  ways  of 
the  Lord,  and  to  maintain  morality  of  conduct  in  its  strictest  form. 

'  The  fear  of  God  is  to  be  united  with  the  love  of  God  ;  for  love  without 
fear  makes  men  remiss,  and  fear  without  love  makes  them  servile  and  desperate 
(J.  Gerhard). 


344  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

This  fear,  which  first  enables  us  to  comprehend  the  mercy  of  God, 
awakens  love,  the  fruit  of  which  is  manifested  in  serving  God  with 
all  the  heart  and  all  the  soul  (see  chap.  vi.  5).  "  For  thy  good^^  as 
in  chap.  v.  30  and  vi.  24. — Vers.  14,  15.  This  obligation  the  Lord 
had  laid  upon  Israel  by  the  love  with  which  He,  to  whom  all  the 
heavens  and  the  earth,  with  everything  upon  it,  belong,  had  chosen 
the  patriarchs  and  their  seed  out  of  all  nations.  By  "  the  heavens 
of  the  heavens,"  the  idea  of  heaven  is  perfectly  exhausted.  This 
God,  who  might  have  chosen  any  other  nation  as  well  as  Israel,  or 
in  fact  all  nations  together,  had  directed  His  special  love  to  Israel 
alone. 

Vers.  16-22.  Above  all,  therefore,  they  were  to  circumcise  the 
foreskin  of  their  hearts,  i.e.  to  lay  aside  all  insensibility  of  heart  to 
impressions  from  the  love  of  God  (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  41 ;  and  on  the 
spiritual  signification  of  circumcision,  see  vol.  i.  p.  227),  and  not 
stiffen  their  necks  any  more,  i.e.  not  persist  in  their  obstinacy,  or 
obstinate  resistance  to  God  (cf.  chap.  ix.  6,  13).  Without  circum- 
cision of  heart,  true  fear  of  God  and  true  love  of  God  are  both  im- 
possible. As  a  reason  for  this  admonition,  Moses  adduces  in  vers. 
17  sqq.  the  nature  and  acts  of  God.  Jehovah  as  the  absolute  God 
and  Lord  is  mighty  and  terrible  towards  all,  without  respect  of 
person,  and  at  the  same  time  a  just  Judge  and  loving  Protector 
of  the  helpless  and  oppressed.  From  this  it  follows  that  the  true 
God  will  not  tolerate  haughtiness  and  stiffness  of  neck  either 
towards  Himself  or  towards  other  men,  but  will  punish  it  without 
reserve.  To  set  forth  emphatically  the  infinite  greatness  and  might 
of  God,  Moses  describes  Jehovah  the  God  of  Israel  as  the  "  God  of 
gods^^  i.e.  the  supreme  God,  the  essence  of  all  that  is  divine,  of  all 
divine  power  and  might  (cf.  Ps.  cxxxvi.  2), — and  as  the  "  Lord  of 
lords"  i.e.  the  supreme,  unrestricted  Ruler  (" the  only  Potentate," 
1  Tim.  vi.  15),  above  all  powers  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  "  a  great 
King  above  all  gods"  (Ps.  xcv.  3).  Compare  Rev.  xvii.  14  and  xix. 
16,  where  these  predicates  are  transferred  to  the  exalted  Son  of 
God,  as  the  Judge  and  Conqueror  of  all  dominions  and  powers  that 
are  hostile  to  God.  The  predicates  which  follow  describe  the  un- 
folding of  the  omnipotence  of  God  in  the  government  of  the  world, 
in  which  Jehovah  manifests  Himself  as  the  great,  mighty,  and  ter- 
rible God  (Ps.  Ixxxix.  8),  who  does  not  regard  the  person  (cf.  Lev. 
xix.  15),  or  accept  presents  (cf.  chap.  xvi.  19),  like  a  human  judge. 
— Vers.  18,  19.  As  such,  Jehovah  does  justice  to  the  defenceless 
(orphan  and  widow),  and  exercises  a  loving  care  towards  the  stranger 


CHAP.  XL  1-12.  345 

in  his  oppression.  For  this  reason  the  Israelites  were  not  to  close 
their  hearts  egotistically  against  the  stranger  (cf.  Ex.  xxii.  20). 
This  would  show  whether  they  possessed  any  love  to  God,  and  had 
circumcised  their  hearts  (cf.  1  John  iii.  10,  17). — Vers.  20  sqq. 
After  laying  down  the  fundamental  condition  of  a  proper  relation 
towards  God,  Moses  describes  the  fear  of  God,  i.e.  true  reverence 
of  God,  in  its  threefold  manifestation,  in  deed  (serving  God),  in 
heart  (cleaving  to  Him ;  cf .  chap.  iv.  4),  and  with  the  mouth  (swear- 
ing by  His  name ;  cf.  chap.  vi.  13).  Such  reverence  as  this  Israel 
owed  to  its  God  ;  for  "  He  is  thy  praise^  and  He  is  thy  God  "  (ver. 
21).  He  has  given  thee  strong  inducements  to  praise.  By  the 
great  and  terrible  things  which  thine  eyes  have  seen.  He  has  mani- 
fested Himself  as  God  to  thee.  "  Terrible  things"  are  those  acts 
of  divine  omnipotence,  which  fill  men  with  fear  and  trembling  at 
the  majesty  of  the  Almighty  (cf.  Ex.  xv.  11).  ^ri«  nj>V,  "done 
with  thee,"  i.e.  shown  to  thee  (HX  in  the  sense  of  practical  help). — 
Ver.  22.  One  marvel  among  these  great  and  terrible  acts  of  the 
Lord  was  to  be  seen  in  Israel  itself,  which  had  gone  down  to  Egypt 
in  the  persons  of  its  fathers  as  a  family  consisting  of  seventy  souls, 
and  now,  notwithstanding  the  oppression  it  suffered  there,  'had 
grown  into  an  innumerable  nation.  So  marvellously  had  the  Lord 
fulfilled  His  promise  in  Gen.  xv.  5.  By  referring  to  this  promise, 
Moses  intended  no  doubt  to  recall  to  the  recollection  of  the  people 
the  fact  that  the  bondage  of  Israel  in  a  foreign  land  for  400  years 
had  also  been  foretold  (Gen.  xv.  13  sqq.).  On  the  seventy  souls, 
see  at  Gen.  xlvi.  26,  27. 

Chap.  xi.  In  vers.  1-12  the  other  feature  in  the  divine  require- 
ments (chap.  X.  12),  viz.  love  to  the  Lord  their  God,  is  still  more 
fully  developed.  Love  was  to  show  itself  in  the  distinct  perception 
of  what  had  to  be  observed  towards  Jehovah  (to  "  keep  His  charge" 
see  at  Lev.  viii.  35),  i.e.  in  the  perpetual  observance  of  His  com- 
mandments and  rights.  The  words,  " and  His  statutes"  etc.,  serve 
to  explain  the  general  notion,  "His  charge."  '^  All  days,"  as  in 
chap.  iv.  10. — ^Vers.  2  sqq.  To  awaken  this  love  they  were  now  to 
know,  i.e.  to  ponder  and  lay  to  heart,  the  discipline  of  the  Lord 
their  God.  The  words  from  ''for  (I  speak)  not"  to  "  have  not  seen  " 
are  a  parenthetical  clause,  by  which  Moses  would  impress  his  words 
most  strongly  upon  the  hearts  of  the  older  generation,  which  had 
witnessed  the  acts  of  the  Lord.  The  clause  is  without  any  verb  or 
predicate,  but  this  can  easily  be  supplied  from  the  sense.  The  best 
suggestion  is  that  of  Schultz,  viz.  ifririn  "lij'nn,  "  for  it  is  not  with  your 


346  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

children  that  I  have  to  do,"  not  to  them  that  this  admonition  applies. 
Moses  refers  to  the  children  who  had  been  born  in  the  desert,  as  ' 
distinguished  from  those  who,  though  not  twenty  years  old  when  ll 
the  Israelites  cam&  out  of  Egypt,  had  nevertheless  seen  with  their 
own  eyes  the  plagues  inflicted  upon  Egypt,  and  who  were  now  of 
mature  age,  viz.  between  forty  and  sixty  years  old,  and  formed,  as 
the  older  and  more  experienced  generation,  the  stock  and  kernel  of 
the  concrregation  assembled  round  him  now.  To  the  words,  "  which 
have  not  known  and  have  not  seen"  it  is  easy  to  supply  from  the 
context,  "  what  ye  have  known  and  seen."  The  accusatives  from 
^^the  chastisement"  onwards  belong  to  the  verb  of  the  principal 
sentence,  "  know  ye  this  day."  The  accusatives  which  follow  show 
what  we  are  to  understand  by  "  the  chastisement  of  the  Lord,"  viz. 
the  mighty  acts  of  the  Lord  to  Egypt  and  to  Israel  in  the  desert. 
The  object  of  them  all  was  to  educate  Israel  in  the  fear  and  love  of 
God.  In  this  sense  Moses  calls  them  "IDID  (Eng.  Ver.  chastisement), 
TraiBeca,  i.e.  not  punishment  only,  but  education  by  the  manifesta- 
tion of  love  as  well  as  punishment  (like  "1S^  in  chap.  iv.  36 ;  cf. 
Prov.  i.  2,  8,  iv.  1,  etc.).  "  His  greatness,"  etc.,  as  in  chap.  iii.  24 
and  iv.  34.  On  the  signs  and  acts  in  Egypt,  see  at  chap.  iv.  34, 
vi.  22  ;  and  on  those  at  the  Eed  Sea,  at  Ex.  xiv.  DiT^S-i^y— ^l^n  im, 
^'  over  tohose  face  lie  made  the  waters  of  the  Red  Sea  to  flow ;"  cf. 
Ex.  xiv.  26  sqq. — By  the  acts  of  God  in  the  desert  (ver.  5)  we  are 
not  to  understand  the  chastenings  in  Num.  xi.— xv.  either  solely  or 
pre-eminently,  but  all  the  manifestations  of  the  omnipotence  of 
God  in  the  guidance  of  Israel,  proofs  of  love  as  well  as  the  penal 
wonders.  Of  the  latter,  the  miraculous  destruction  of  the  company 
of  Korah  is  specially  mentioned  in  ver.  6  (cf.  Num.  xvi.  31-33). 
Here  Moses  only  mentions  Dathan  and  Abiram,  the  followers  of 
Korah,  and  not  Korah  himself,  probably  from  regard  to  his  sons, 
who  were  not  swallowed  up  by  the  earth  along  with  their  father,  but 
had  lived  to  perpetuate  the  family  of  Korah.  "  Eveinjtldng  existing, 
which  was  in  their  following"  (see  Ex.  xi.  8),  does  not  mean  their 
possessions,  but  their  servants,  and  corresponds  to  "  all  the  men  who 
belonged  to  Korah"  in  Num.  xvi.  32,  whereas  the  possessions  men- 
tioned there  are  included  here  in  the  "  tents."  Dlpin  is  only  applied 
to  living  beings,  as  in  Gen.  vii.  4  and  23. — In  ver.  7  the  reason  is 
given  for  the  admonition  in  ver.  2 :  the  elders  were  to  know  (dis- 
cern) the  educational  purpose  of  God  in  those  mighty  acts  of  the 
Lord,  because  they  had  seen  them  with  their  own  eyes. — Vers.  8,  9. 
And  this  knowledge  was  to  impel  them  to  keep  the  law,  that  they 


CHAP.  XI.  1-12.  347 

might  be  strong,  i.e,  spiritually  strong  (chap.  i.  38),  and  not  only 
go  into  the  promised  land,  but  also  live  long  therein  (of.  chap.  iv. 
26y  vi.  3). — In  vers.  10-12  Moses  adduces  a  fresh  motive  for  his 
admonition  to  keep  the  law  with  fidelity,  founded  upon  the  peculiar 
nature  of  the  land.  Canaan  was  a  land  the  fertility  of  which  was  not 
dependent,  like  that  of  Egypt,  upon  its  being  watered  by  the  hand 
of  man,  but  was  kept  up  by  the  rain  of  heaven  which  was  sent 
down  by  God  the  Lord,  so  that  it  depended  entirely  upon  the  Lord 
how  long  its  inhabitants  should  live  therein.  Egypt  is  described 
by  Moses  as  a  land  which  Israel  sowed  with  seed,  and  watered  with 
its  foot  like  a  garden  of  herbs.  In  Egypt  there  is  hardly  any  rain 
at  all  (cf.  Herod,  ii.  4,  Diod.  Sic.  i.  41,  and  other  evidence  in 
Hengstenberg' s  Egypt  and  the  Books  of  Moses,  pp.  217  sqq.).  The 
watering  of  the  land,  which  produces  its  fertility,  is  dependent 
upon  the  annual  overflowing  of  the  Nile,  and,  as  this  only  lasts  for 
about  100  days,  upon  the  way  in  which  this  is  made  available  for 
the  whole  year,  namely,  by  the  construction  of  canals  and  ponds 
throughout  the  land,  to  which  the  water  is  conducted  from  the 
Nile  by  forcing  machines,  or  by  actually  carrying  it  in  vessels  up 
to  the  fields  and  plantations.^  The  expression,  "  with  thy  foot," 
probably  refers  to  the  large  pumping  wheels  still  in  use  there,  which 
are  worked  by  the  feet,  and  over  which  a  long  endless  rope  passes 
with  pails  attached,  for  drawing  up  the  water  (cf.  Niebuhr,  Reise, 
i.  149),  the  identity  of  which  with  the  e\tj  described  by  Philo  as 
vBpr)\ov  opjavov  {de  confus,  ling,  i.  410)  cannot  possibly  be  called 
in  question ;  provided,  that  is  to  say,  we  do  not  confound  this  eXtf 
with  the  Archimedean  water-screw  mentioned  by  Diod.  Sic.  i.  34, 
and  described  more  minutely  at  v.  37,  the  construction  of  which 
was  entirely  different  (see  my  Archaeology,  ii.  pp.  111-2). — The 
Egyptians,  as  genuine  heathen,  were  so  thoroughly  conscious  of 
this  peculiar  characteristic  of  their  land,  which  made  its  fertility 
far  more  dependent  upon  the  labour  of  human  hands  than  upon 
the  rain  of  heaven  or  divine  providence,  that  Herodotus  (ii.  13) 
represents  them  as  saying,  "The  Greeks,  with  their  dependence 
upon  the  gods,  might  be  disappointed  in  their  brightest  hopes  and 

^  Upon  the  ancient  monuments  we  find  not  only  the  draw-well  with  the 
long  rope,  which  is  now  called  Shaduf,  depicted  in  various  ways  (see  Wilkinson, 
i.  p.  35,  ii.  4)  ;  but  at  Beni-Hassan  there  is  a  representation  of  two  men  carry- 
ing a  water- vessel  upon  a  pole  on  their  shoulders,  which  they  fill  from  a  draw- 
well  or  pond,  and  then  carry  to  the  field  (cf.  Hengstenberg,  Egypt  and  the 
Books  of  Moses,  pp.  220-1). 


348  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

suffer  dreadfully  from  famine."  The  land  of  Canaan  yielded  no 
support  to  such  godless  self-exaltation,  for  it  was  "  a  land  of  moun- 
tains and  valleys,  and  drank  water  of  the  rain  of  heaven"  (^  before 
"•^O,  to  denote  the  external  cause ;  see  Ewald,  §  217,  d.)  ;  i.e,  it 
received  its  watering,  the  main  condition  of  all  fertility,  from  the 
rain,  by  the  way  of  the  rain,  and  therefore  through  the  providen- 
tial care  of  God. — Ver.  12.  It  was  a  land  which  Jehovah  inquired 
after,  i.e,  for  which  He  cared  (yV\^  as  in  Prov.  xxxi.  13,  Job  iii. 
4) ;  His  eyes  were  always  directed  towards  it  from  the  beginning 
of  the  year  to  the  end;  a  land,  therefore,  which  was  dependent 
upon  God,  and  in  this  dependence  upon  God  peculiarly  adapted 
to  Israel,  which  was  to  live  entirely  to  its  God,  and  upon  His 
grace  alone. 

Vers.  13-32.  This  peculiarity  in  the  land  of  Canaan  led  Moses 
to  close  the  first  part  of  his  discourse  on  the  law,  his  exhortation  to 
fear  and  love  the  Lord,  with  a  reference  to  the  blessing  that  would 
follow  the  faithful  fulfilment  of  the  law,  and  a  threat  of  the  curse 
which  would  attend  apostasy  to  idolatry. — Vers.  13-15.  If  Israel 
would  serve  its  God  in  love  and  faithfulness.  He  would  give  the 
land  early  and  latter  rain  in  its  season,  and  therewith  a  plentiful 
supply  of  food  for  man  and  beast  (see  Lev.  xxvi.  3  and  5 ;  and  for 
the  further  expansion  of  this  blessing,  chap,  xxviii.  1—12). — Vers.  16 
and  17.  But  if,  on  the  other  hand,  their  heart  was  foolish  to  turn 
away  from  the  Lord  and  serve  other  gods,  the  wrath  of  the  Lord 
would  burn  against  them,  and  God  would  shut  up  the  heaven,  that 
no  rain  should  fall  and  the  earth  should  yield  no  produce,  and  they 
would  speedily  perish  (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  19,  20,  and  Deut.  xxviii. 
23,  24).  Let  them  therefore  impress  the  words  now  set  before 
them  very  deeply  upon  themselves  and  their  children  (vers.  18-21, 
in  which  there  is  in  part  a  verbal  repetition  of  chap.  vi.  6-9).  The 
words,  '^as  the  days  of  the  heaven  above  the  earth^^  i.e.  as  long  as  the 
heaven  continues  above  the  earth, — in  other  words,  to  all  eternity 
(cf.  Ps.  Ixxxix.  30 ;  Job  xiv.  12), — belong  to  the  main  sentence, 
''that  your  days  may  he  multiplied^^  etc.  (ver.  21).  "  The  promise 
to  give  the  land  to  Israel  for  ever  was  not  made  unconditionally;  an 
unconditional  promise  is  precluded  by  the  words,  '  that  your  days 
may  be  multiplied'"  {Schultz).  (For  further  remarks,  see  at  chap. 
XXX.  3-5.)  For  (vers.  22-25)  if  they  adhered  *  faithfully  to  the 
Lord,  He  would  drive  out  before  them  all  the  nations  that  dwelt  in 
the  land,  and  would  give  them  the  land  upon  which  they  trod  in 
all  its  length  and  breadth,  and  so  fill  the  Canaanites  with  fear  and 


I 


CHAP.  XL  13-32.  349 

terror  before  them,  that  no  one  should  be  able  to  stand  against 
them.  (On  ver.  23,  cf.  chap.  vii.  1,  2,  ix.  1,  and  i.  28.)  The 
words,  "  every  place  whereon  the  soles  of  your  feet  shall  tread  shall 
be  yours,"  are  defined  more  precisely,  and  restricted  to  the  land  of 
Canaan  on  both  sides  of  the  Jordan  by  the  boundaries  which  follow : 
''from  the  desert  (of  Arabia  on  the  south),  and  Lebanon  (on  the 
north),  and  from  the  river  Euphrates  (on  the  east)  to  the  hinder 
6'^a"  (the  Mediterranean  on  the  west;  see  Num.  xxxiv.  6).  The 
Euphrates  is  given  as  the  eastern  boundary,  as  in  chap.  i.  7,  accord- 
ing to  the  promise  in  Gen.  xv.  18.  (On  ver.  25,  cf.  chap.  vii.  24, 
ii.  25,  and  Ex.  xxiii.  27.) — Vers.  26-28.  Concluding  summary. 
" / set  before  you  this  day  the  blessing  and  the  curse"  The  blessing, 
if  (^C'^5,  ore,  as  in  Lev.  iv.  22)  ye  hearken  to  the  commandments  of 
your  God ;  the  curse,  if  ye  do  not  give  heed  to  them,  but  turn  aside 
from  the  way  pointed  out  to  you,  to  go  after  other  gods.  To  this 
there  are  added  instructions  in  vers.  29  and  30,  that  when  they 
took  possession  of  the  land  they  should  give  the  blessing  upon 
Mount  Gerizim  and  the  curse  upon  Mount  Ebal^  i.e.  should  give 
utterance  to  them  there,  and  as  it  were  transfer  them  to  the  land 
to  be  apportioned  to  its  inhabitants  according  to  their  attitude 
towards  the  Lord  their  God.  (For  further  comment,  see  at  chap, 
xxvii.  14.)  The  two  mountains  mentioned  were  selected  for  this 
act,  no  doubt  because  they  were  opposite  to  one  another,  and  stood, 
each  about  2500  feet  high,  in  the. very  centre  of  the  land  not  only 
from  west  to  east,  but  also  from  north  to  south.  Ebal  stands  upon 
the  north  side,  Gerizim  upon  the  south ;  between  the  two  is  Sichem, 
the  present  Nabubis,  in  a  tolerably  elevated  valley,  fertile,  attractive, 
and  watered  by  many  springs,  which  runs  from  the  south-east  to 
the  north-west  from  the  foot  of  Gerizim  to  that  of  Ebal,  and  is 
about  1000  feet  in  breadth.  The  blessing  was  to  be  uttered  upon 
Gerizim,  and  the  curse  upon  Ebal ;  though  not,  as  the  earlier  com- 
mentators supposed,  because  the  peculiarities  of  these  mountains, 
viz.  the  fertility  of  Gerizim  and  the  barrenness  of  Ebal,  appeared 
to  accord  with  this  arrangement :  for  when  seen  from  the  valley 
between,  "  the  sides  of  both  these  mountains  are  equally  naked  and 
sterile ;"  and  "the  only  exception  in  favour  of  the  former  is  a  small 
ravine  coming  down,  opposite  the  west  end  of  the  town,  which  is  in- 
deed full  of  fountains  and  trees"  (Rob.  Pal.  iii.  96,  97).  The  reason 
for  selecting  Gerizim  for  the  blessings  was  probably,  as  Schultz 
supposes,  the  fact  that  it  was  situated  on  the  south,  towards  the 
region  of  the  light.    "Light  and  blessing  are  essentially  one.   From 


350  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  light-giving  face  of  God  there  come  blessing  and  life  (Ps.  xvi. 
11)." — In  ver.  30  the  situation  of  these  mountains  is  more  clearly 
defined :  they  were  " on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan,^  i.e.  in  the 
land  to  the  west  of  the  Jordan,  "  behind  the  way  of  the  sunset,^'  i.e. 
on  the  other  side  of  the  road  of  the  west,  which  runs  through  the 
land  on  the  west  of  the  Jordan,  just  as  another  such  road  runs 
through  the  land  on  the  east  {Knohel).  The  reference  is  to  the 
main  road  which  ran  from  Upper  Asia  through  Canaan  to  Egypt, 
as  was  shown  by  the  journeys  of  Abraham  and  Jacob  (Gen.  xii. 
6,  xxxiii.  17,  18).  Even  at  the  present  day  the  main  road  leads 
from  Beisan  to  Jerusalem  round  the  east  side  of  Ebal  into  the 
valley  of  Sichem,  and  then  again  eastwards  from  Gerizim  through 
the  Mukra  valley  on  towards  the  south  (cf .  Roh.  iii.  94 ;  Hitter, 
Erdkunde,  xvi.  pp.  658-9).  "/?i  the  land  of  the  Canaanite  who 
dwells  in  the  ArabahV  By  the  Arabah,  Knohel  understands  the 
plain  of  Nahulus,  which  is  not  much  less  than  four  hours'  journey 
long,  and  on  an  average  from  a  half  to  three-quarters  broad,  "  the 
largest  of  all  upon  the  elevated  tract  of  land  between  the  western 
plain  and  the  valley  of  the  Jordan "  {Rob.  iii.  p.  101).  This  is 
decidedly  wrong,  however,  as  it  is  opposed  to  the  fixed  use  of  the 
word,  and  irreconcilable  with  the  character  of  this  plain,  which, 
Robinson  says,  '*  is  cultivated  throughout  and  covered  with  the  rich 
green  of  millet  intermingled  with  the  yellow  of  the  ripe  corn,  which 
the  country  people  were  just  reaping"  (Pal.  iii.  93).  The  Arabah 
is  the  western  portion  of  the  Ghor  (see  at  chap.  i.  1),  and  is  men- 
tioned here  as  that  portion  of  the  land  on  the  west  of  the  Jordan 
which  lay  stretched  out  before  the  eyes  of  the  Israelites  who  were 
encamped  in  the  steppes  of  Moab.  "  Over  against  Gilgal^^  i.e.  not 
the  southern  Gilgal  between  Jericho  and  the  Jordan,  which  received 
its  name  for  the  first  time  in  Josh.  iv.  20  and  v.  9 ;  but  probably 
the  Gilgal  mentioned  in  Josh.  ix.  6,  x.  6  sqq.,  and  very  frequently 
in  the  history  of  Samuel,  Elijah,  and  Elisha,  which  is  only  about 
twelve  and  a  half  miles  from  Gerizim  in  a  southern  direction,  and 
has  been  preserved  in  the  large  village  of  Jiljilia  to  the  south-west 
of  Sinjil,  and  which  stands  in  such  an  elevated  position,  "  close  to 
the  western  brow  of  the  high  mountain  tract,"  that  you  "have 
here  a  very  extensive  prospect  over  the  great  lower  plain,  and 
also  over  the  sea,  whilst  the  mountains  of  Gilead  are  seen  in  the 
east"  {Rob.  Pal.  iii.  81).  Judging  from  this  description  of  the 
situation.  Mount  Gerizim  must  be  visible  from  this  Gilgal,  so  that 
Gerizim  and  Ebal  might  very  well  be  described  as  over  againsfc 


CHAP.  XII.-XXVI.  351 

Gilgal.^  The  last  definition,  "  beside  the  terehintJis  of  Moreh^^  is 
intended  no  doubt  to  call  to  mind  the  consecration  of  that  locality 
even  from  the  times  of  the  patriarchs  (^Schultz :  see  at  Gen.  xii.  6, 
and  XXXV.  4). — Vers.  31-2  contain  the  reason  for  these  instruc- 
tions, founded  upon  the  assurance  that  the  Israelites  were  going 
over  the  Jordan  and  would  take  possession  of  the  promised  land, 
and  should  therefore  take  care  to  keep  the  commandments  of  the 
Lord  (cf.  chap.  iv.  5,  6). 

B.  EXPOSITION  OF  THE  PRINCIPAL  LAWS. — CHAP.  XII.-XXVI. 

The  statutes  and  rights  which  follow  in  the  second  or  special 
half  of  this  address,  and  which  consist  in  part  of  rules  having 
regard  to  circumstances  not  contemplated  by  the  Sinaitic  laws,  and 
partly  of  repetitions  of  laws  already  given,  w^ere  designed  as  a  whole 
to  regulate  the  ecclesiastical,  civil,  and  domestic  life  of  Israel  in  the 
land  of  Canaan,  in  harmony  with  its  calling  to  be  the  holy  nation 
of  the  Lord.  Moses  first  of  all  describes  the  religious  and  eccle- 
siastical life  of  the  nation,  in  its  various  relations  to  the  Lord  (chap, 
xii.-xvi.  17)  ;  and  then  the  political  organization  of  the  congrega- 
tion, or  the  rights  and  duties  of  the  civil  and  spiritual  leaders  of  the 
nation  (chap.  xvi.  18-xviii.  22) ;  and  lastly,  seeks  to  establish  upon 
a  permanent  basis  the  civil  and  domestic  well-being  of  the  whole 
congregation  and  its  individual  members,  by  a  multiplicity  of  pre- 
cepts, intended  to  set  before  the  people,  as  a  conscientious  obli- 
gation on  their  part,  reverence  and  holy  awe  in  relation  to  human 
life,  to  property,  and  to  personal  rights ;  a  pious  regard  for  the 
fundamental  laws  of  the  world ;  sanctification  of  domestic  life  and 
of  the  social  bond ;  practical  brotherly  love  towards  the  poor,  the 
oppressed,  and  the  needy ;  and  righteousness  of  walk  and  conversa- 
tion (chap,  xix.-xxvi.). — So  far  as  the  arrangement  of  this  address 
is  concerned,  the  first  two  series  of  these  laws  may  be  easily  regarded 

^  There  is  much  less  ground  for  the  opinion  of  Winer,  Knohel,  and  SchultZy 
that  Gilgal  is  the  Jiljule  mentioned  by  Rohinson  {Pal.  iii.  47 ;  and  Bihl.  Researches, 
p.  138),  which  evidently  corresponds  to  the  Galgula  placed  by  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  six  Roman  miles  from  Antipatris,  and  is  situated  to  the  south-east  of 
Kefr  Saba  (Aniipatris),  on  the  road  from  Egypt  to  Damascus.  For  this  place 
is  not  only  farther  from  Gerizim  and  Ebal,  viz.  about  seventeen  miles,  but  from 
its  position  in  the  lowland  by  the  sea-shore  it  presents  no  salient  point  for 
determining  the  situation  of  the  mountains  of  Gerizim  and  Ebal.  Still  less  can 
we  agree  with  Knobel,  who  speaks  of  the  village  of  Kilkilia,  to  the  north-east  of 
Kefr  Saba,  as  the  name  itself  has  nothing  in  common  with  Gilgal. 


352  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

as  expositions,  expansions,  and  completions  of  the  commandments 
in  the  decalogue  in  relation  to  the  Sabbath,  and  to  the  duty  of 
honouring  parents ;  and  in  the  third  series  also  there  are  unques- 
tionably many  allusions  to  the  commandments  in  the  second  table 
of  the  decalogue.  But  the  order  in  which  the  different  laws  and 
precepts  in  this  last  series  are  arranged,  does  not  follow  the  order 
of  the  decalogue,  so  as  to  warrant  us  in  looking  there  for  the  leading 
principle  of  the  arrangement,  as  Schultz  has  done.  Moses  allows 
himself  to  be  guided  much  more  by  analogies  and  the  free  associa- 
tion of  ideas  than  by  any  strict  regard  to  the  decalogue ;  although, 
no  doubt,  the  whole  of  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  may  be  described, 
as  Luther  says,  as  "  a  very  copious  and  lucid  explanation  of  the 
decalogue,  an  acquaintance  with  which  will  supply  all  that  is  requi- 
site to  a  full  understanding  of  the  ten  commandments." 

Tlie  one  Place  for  the  Worship  of  God,  and  the  right  Mode  of 
worshipping  Him. — Chap.  xii. 

The  laws  relating  to  the  worship  of  the  Israelites  commence  with 
a  command  to  destroy  and  annihilate  all  places  and  memorials  of 
the  Canaanitish  worship  (vers.  2-4),  and  then  lay  it  down  as  an 
established  rule,  that  the  Israelites  were  to  worship  the  Lord  their 
God  with  sacrifices  and  gifts,  only  in  the  place  which  He  Himself 
should  choose  (vers.  5-14).  On  the  other  hand,  in  the  land  of 
Canaan  cattle  might  be  slain  for  eating  and  the  flesh  itself  be  con- 
sumed in  any  place ;  though  sacrificial  meals  could  only  be  cele- 
brated in  the  place  of  the  sanctuary  appointed  by  the  Lord  (vers. 
15—19).  Moreover,  on  the  extension  of  the  borders  of  the  land, 
oxen,  and  sheep,  and  goats  could  be  slaughtered  for  food  in  any 
place ;  but  the  blood  was  not  to  be  eaten,  and  consecrated  gifts  and 
votive  sacrifices  were  not  to  be  prepared  as  meals  anywhere,  except 
at  the  altar  of  the  Lord  (vers.  20-28).  Lastly,  the  Israelites  were 
not  to  be  drawn  aside  by  the  Canaanites,  to  imitate  them  in  their 
worship  (yers.  29—31). 

Vers.  1-14.  On  the  heading  in  ver.  1,  see  chaps,  vi.  1  and  iv.  1. 
"  All  the  days  that  ye  livi'  relates  to  the  more  distant  clause,  "  which 
ye  shall  observe,"  etc.  (cf.  chap.  iv.  10). — Vers.  2,  3.  Ye  shall  de- 
stroy all  the  places  where  the  Canaanites  worship  their  gods,  upon 
the  high  mountains,  upon  the  hills,  and  under  every  green  tree  (cf. 
Jer.  ii.  20,  iii.  6,  xvii.  2  ;  2  Kings  xvi.  4,  xvii.  10).  The  choice  of 
mountains  and  hills  for  places  of  worship  by  most  of  the  heathen 
nations,  had  its  origin  in  the  wide-spread  belief,  that  men  were 


CHAP.  xir.  1-14.  353 

nearer  to  the  Deity  and  to  heaven  there.  The  green  trees  are  con- 
nected with  the  holy  groves,  of  wliich  the  heathen  nations  were  so 
fond,  and  the  shady  gloom  of  which  filled  the  soul  with  holy  awe  at 
the  nearness  of  the  Deity.  In  the  absence  of  groves,  they  chose  green 
trees  with  thick  foliage  (Ezek.  vi.  13,  xx.  28),  such  as  the  vigorous 
oak,  which  attains  a  great  age,  the  evergreen  terebinth  (Isa.  i.  29, 
30,  Ivii.  5),  and  the  poplar  or  osier,  which  continues  green  even  in 
the  heat  of  summer  (Hos.  iv.  13),  and  whose  deep  shade  is  adapted 
to  dispose  the  mind  to  devotion. — Ver.  3.  Beside  the  places  of 
worship,  they  were  also  to  destroy  all  the  idols  of  the  Canaanitish 
worship,  as  had  already  been  commanded  in  chap.  vii.  5,  and  to  blot 
out  even  their  names,  i.e.  every  trace  of  their  existence  (cf.  chap, 
vii.  24). — Ver.  4.  "  Ye  shall  7iot  do  so  to  Jehovah  your  God^^  i.e.  not 
build  altars  and  offer  sacrifices  to  Him  in  any  place  you  choose,  but 
(vers.  5  sqq.)  shall  only  keep  yourselves  (^^  KH"!)  to  the  place  "  which 
He  shall  choose  out  of  all  the  tribes  to  put  His  name  there  for  His 
dwellingJ^  Whereas  the  heathen  seeks  and  worships  his  nature- 
gods,  wherever  he  thinks  he  can  discern  in  nature  any  trace  of 
Divinity,  the  true  God  has  not  only  revealed  His  eternal  power  and 
Godhead  in  the  works  of  creation,  but  His  personal  being,  which 
unfolds  itself  to  the  world  in  love  and  holiness,  in  grace  and  right- 
eousness, He  has  made  known  to  man,  who  was  created  in  His  image, 
in  the  w^ords  and  works  of  salvation  ;  and  in  these  testimonies  of 
His  saving  presence  He  has  fixed  for  Himself  a  name,  in  which  He 
dwells  among  His  people.  This  name  presents  His  personality,  as 
comprehended  in  the  word  Jehovah,  in  a  visible  sign,  the  tangible 
pledge  of  His  essential  presence.  During  the  journeying  of  the 
Israelites  this  was  effected  by  the  pillar  of  cloud  and  fire ;  and  after 
the  erection  of  the  tabernacle,  by  the  cloud  in  the  most  holy  place, 
above  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  with  the  cherubim  upon  it,  in  which 
Jehovah  had  promised  to  appear  to  the  high  priest  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  covenant  nation.  Through  this,  the  tabernacle, 
and  afterwards  Solomon's  temple,  which  took  its  place,  became  the 
dwelling-place  of  the  name  of  the  Lord.  But  if  the* knowledge  of 
the  true  God  rested  upon  direct  manifestations  of  the  divine  na- 
ture,— and  the  Lord  God  had  for  that  very  reason  made  Himself 
known  to  His  people  in  words  and  deeds  as  their  God, — then  as  a 
matter  of  course  the  mode  of  His  worship  could  not  be  dependent 
upon  any  appointment  of  men,  but  must  be  determined  exclusively 
by  God  Himself.  The  place  of  His  worship  depended  upon  the 
choice  which  God  Himself  should  make,  and  which  would  be  made 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  Z 


354  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

known  by  the  fact  that  He  "  put  His  name/'  i.e.  actually  mani- 
fested His  own  immediate  presence,  in  one  definite  spot.  By  the 
building  of  the  tabernacle,  which  the  Lord  Himself  prescribed  as 
the  true  spot  for  the  revelation  of  His  presence  among  His  people, 
the  place  where  His  name  was  to  dwell  among  the  Israelites  was 
already  so  far  determined,  that  only  the  particular  town  or  locality 
among  the  tribes  of  Israel  where  the  tabernacle  was  to  be  set  up 
after  the  conquest  of  Canaan  remained  to  be  decided.  At  the  same 
time,  Moses  not  only  speaks  of  the  Lord  choosing  the  place  among 
all  the  tribes  for  the  erection  of  His  sanctuary,  but  also  of  His 
choosing  the  place  where  He  would  put  His  name,  that  He  might 
dwell  there  (i^^^  from  \^^,  for  i^^K^  from  pp).  For  the  presence  of 
the  Lord  was  not,  and  was  not  intended,  to  be  exclusively  confined  to 
the  tabernacle  (or  the  temple).  As  God  of  the  whole  earth,  wher- 
ever it  might  be  necessary,  for  the  preservation  and  promotion  of  His 
kingdom,  He  could  make  known  His  presence,  and  accept  the  sacri- 
fices of  His  people  in  other  places,  independently  of  this  sanctuary  ; 
and  there  were  times  when  this  was  really  done.  The  unity  of  the 
worship,  therefore,  which  Moses  here  enjoined,  was  not  to  consist  in 
the  fact  that  the  people  of  Israel  brought  all  their  sacrificial  offerings 
to  the  tabernacle,  but  in  their  offering  them  only  in  the  spot  where 
the  Lord  made  His  name  (that  is  to  say,  His  presence)  known. 

What  Moses  commanded  here,  was  only  an  explanation  and 
more  emphatic  repetition  of  the  divine  command  in  Ex.  xx.  23,  24 
(21  and  22)  ;  and  to  understand  "the  place  which  Jehovah  would 
choose  "  as  relating  exclusively  to  Jerusalem  or  the  temple-hill,  is  a 
perfectly  arbitrary  assumption.  Shiloh,  the  place  where  the  taber- 
nacle was  set  up  after  the  conquest  of  the  land  (Josh,  xviii.  1),  and 
where  it  stood  during  the  whole  of  the  times  of  the  judges,  was  also 
chosen  by  the  Lord  (cf.  Jer.  vii.  12).  It  was  not  till  after  David 
had  set  up  a  tent  for  the  ark  of  the  covenant  upon  Zion,  in  the  city 
of  Jerusalem,  which  he  had  chosen  as  the  capital  of  his  kingdom, 
and  had  erected  an  altar  for  sacrifice  there  (2  Sam.  vi.  17  ;  1  Chron. 
xvi.),  that  the  will  of  the  Lord  was  made  known  to  him  by  the 
prophet  Gad,  that  he  should  build  an  altar  upon  the  threshing-floor 
of  Araunah,  where  the  angel  of  the  Lord  had  appeared  to  him ;  and 
through  this  command  the  place  was  fixed  for  the  future  temple 
(2  Sam.  xxiv.  18 ;  1  Chron.  xxi.  18).  tr)"!  with  7NI,  to  turn  in  a 
certain  direction,  to  inquire  or  to  seek.  iO^"~nK  DVC^^  "  to  put  His 
name,"  i.e.  to  make  known  His  presence,  is  still  further  defined  by 
the  following  word  i^^^v?  ^s  signifying  that  His  presence  was  to  be 


CHAP.  XII.  1-14.  355 

of  permanent  duration.  It  is  true  that  this  word  is  separated  by 
an  athnach  from  the  previous  clause;  but  it  certainly  cannot  be 
connected  with  12^.1^  (ye  shall  seek),  not  only  because  of  the  stand- 
ing phrase,  D^  ^^^  |3^^  ("  to  came  His  name  to  dwell  there"  ver. 

11,  chap.  xiv.  23,  xvi.  2,  6,  etc.),  but  also  because  this  connection 
would  give  no  fitting  sense,  as  the  infinitive  |?^  does  not  mean  "  a 
dwelling-place." — Vers.  6,  7.  Thither  they  were  to  take  all  their 
sacrificial  gifts,  and  there  they  were  to  celebrate  their  sacrificial 
meals.  The  gifts  are  classified  in  four  pairs :  (1)  the  sacrifices 
intended  for  the  altar,  burnt-offerings  and  slain-offerings  being 
particularly  mentioned  as  the  two  principal  kinds,  with  which, 
according  to  Num.  xv.  4  sqq.,  meat-offerings  and  drink-offerings 
were  to  be  associated  ;  (2)  "  your  tithes  and  every  heave-offering  of 
your  hand."  By  the  tithes  we  are  to  understand  the  tithes  of  field- 
produce  and  cattle,  commanded  in  Lev.  xxvii.  30-  33  and  Num. 
xviii.  21-24,  which  were  to  be  brought  to  the  sanctuary  because 
they  were  to  be  offered  to  the  Lord,  as  was  the  case  under  Hezekiah 
(2  Chron.  xxxi.  5-7).  That  the  tithes  mentioned  here  should  be 
restricted  to  vegetable  tithes  (of  com,  new  wine,  and  oil),  is  neither 
allowed  by  the  general  character  of  the  expression,  nor  required  by 
the  context.     For  instance,  although,  according  to  vers.  7  and  11, 

12,  as  compared  with  ver.  17,  a  portion  of  the  vegetable  tithe  was 
to  be  applied  to  the  sacrificial  meals,  there  is  no  ground  whatever 
for  supposing  that  all  the  sacrifices  and  consecrated  gifts  mentioned 
in  ver.  6  were  offerings  of  this  kind,  and  either  served  as  sacrificial 
meals,  or  had  such  meals  connected  with  them.  Burnt-offerings, 
for  example,  were  not  associated  in  any  way  with  the  sacrificial 
meals.  The  difficulty,  or  as  some  suppose  "  the  impossibility,"  of 
delivering  all  the  tithes  from  every  part  of  the  land  at  the  place  of 
the  sanctuary,  does  not  warrant  us  in  departing  from  the  simple 
meaning  of  Moses'  words  in  the  verse  before  us.  The  arrangement 
permitted  in  chap.  xiv.  24,  25,  with  reference  to  the  so-called  second 
tithe, — viz.  that  if  the  sanctuary  was  too  far  off,  the  tithe  might  be 
sold  at  home,  and  whatever  was  required  for  the  sacrificial  meals 
might  be  bought  at  the  place  of  the  sanctuary  with  the  money  so 
obtained, — might  possibly  have  been  also  adopted  in  the  case  of  the 
other  tithe.  At  all  events,  the  fact  that  no  reference  is  made  to 
such  cases  as  these  does  not  warrant  us  in  assuming  the  opposite. 
As  the  institution  of  tithes  generally  did  not  originate  with  the  law 
of  Moses,  but  is  presupposed  as  a  traditional  and  well-known  custom, 
— all  that  is  done  being  to  define  them  more  precisely,  and  regulate 


356  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  way  in  which  they  should  be  appHed  (cf.  vol.  ii.  p.  485), — Moses 
does  not  enter  here  into  any  details  as  to  the  coarse  to  be  adopted 
in  delivering  them,  but  merely  lays  down  the  law  that  all  the  gifts 
intended  for  the  Lord  were  to  be  brought  to  Him  at  His  sanctuary, 
and  connects  with  this  the  further  injunction  that  the  Israelites 
were  to  rejoice  there  before  the  Lord,  that  is  to  say,  were  to  cele- 
brate their  sacrificial  meals  at  the  place  of  His  presence  which 
He  had  chosen. — The  gifts,  from  which  the  sacrificial  meals  were 
prepared,  are  not  particularized  here,  but  are  supposed  to  be  already 
known  either  from  the  earlier  laws  or  from  tradition.  From  the 
earlier  laws  we  learn  that  the  whole  of  the  flesh  of  the  burnt- 
offerings  was  to  be  consumed  upon  the  altar,  but  that  the  flesh  of 
the  slain-offerings,  except  in  the  case  of  the  peace-offerings,  was  to 
be  applied  to  the  sacrificial  meals,  with  the  exception  of  the  fat 
pieces,  and  the  wave-breast  and  heave-shoulder.  With  regard  to 
the  tithes,  it  is  stated  in  Num.  xviii.  21-24  that  Jehovah  had  given 
them  to  the  Levites  as  their  inheritance,  and  that  they  were  to  give 
the  tenth  part  of  them  to  the  priests.  In  the  laws  contained  in 
the  earlier  books,  nothing  is  said  about  the  appropriation  of  any 
portion  of  the  tithes  to  sacrificial  meals.  Yet  in  Deuteronomy  this 
is  simply  assumed  as  a  customary  thing,  and  not  introduced  as  a 
new  commandment,  when  the  law  is  laid  down  (in  ver.  17,  chap. 
xiv.  22  sqq.,  xxvi.  12  sqq.),  that  they  were  not  to  eat  the  tithe  of 
corn,  new  wine,  and  oil  within  their  gates  (in  the  towns  of  the 
land),  any  more  than  the  first-born  of  oxen  and  sheep,  but  only  at 
the  place  of  the  sanctuary  chosen  by  the  Lord ;  and  that  if  the 
distance  was  too  great  for  the  whole  to  be  transported  thither,  they 
were  to  sell  the  tithes  and  firsthngs  at  home,  and  then  purchase  at 
the  sanctuary  whatever  might  be  required  for  the  sacrificial  meals. 
From  these  instructions  it  is  very  apparent  that  sacrificial  meals 
were  associated  with  the  delivery  of  the  tithes  and  firstlings  to  the 
Lord,  to  which  a  tenth  part  of  the  corn,  must,  and  oil  was  applied, 
as  well  as  the  flesh  of  the  first-born  of  edible  cattle.  This  tenth 
formed  the  so-called  second  tithe  (Pevrepav  BeKarrjv,  Tob.  i.  7), 
which  is  mentioned  here  for  the  first  time,  but  not  introduced  as  a 
new  rule  or  an  appendix  to  the  former  laws.  It  is  rather  taken  for 
granted  as  a  custom  founded  upon  tradition,  and  brought  into 
harmony  with  the  law  relating  to  the  oneness  of  the  sanctuary  and 
worship.^     "  The  heave-offerings  of  your  hand,"  which  are  mentioned 

^  The  arguments  employed  by  De  Wette  and  Vater  against  tbis  arrangement 
with  regard  to  the  vegetable  tithe,  which  is  established  beyond  all  question  by 


I 


CHAP.  XII.  1-14.  357 

again  in  Mai.  iii.  8  along  with  the  tithes,  are  not  to  be  restricted  to 
the  first-fruits,  as  we  may  see  from  Ezek.  xx.  40,  where  the  terumoth 
are  mentioned  along  with  the  first-fruits.  We  should  rather  under- 
stand them  as  being  free  gifts  of  love,  which  were  consecrated  to 
the  Lord  in  addition  to  the  legal  first-fruits  and  tithes  without  being 
actual  sacrifices,  and  which  were  then  applied  to  sacrificial  meals. — 
The  other  gifts  were  (3)  Q''l']3  and  ^^^'J^,  sacrifices  which  were 
offered  partly  in  consequence  of  vows  and  partly  of  their  own  free 
will  (see  at  Lev.  xxiii.  38,  compared  with  Lev.  vii.  16,  xxii.  21,  and 
Num.  XV.  3,  xxix.  39)  ;  and  lastly  (4),  "  firstlings  of  your  herds  and 
of  your  flocks,"  viz.  those  commanded  in  Ex.  xiii.  2,  12  sqq.,  and 
Num.  xviii.  15  sqq. 

According  to  Ex.  xiii.  15,  the  Israelites  were  to  sacrifice  the 
firstlings  to  the  Lord  ;  and  according  to  Num.  xviii.  8  sqq.  they 
belonged  to  the  holy  gifts,  which  the  Lord  assigned  to  the  priests 
for  their  maintenance,  with  the  more  precise  instructions  in  vers. 
17,  18,  that  the  first-born  of  oxen,  sheep,  and  goats  were  not  to  be 
redeemed,  but  being  holy  were  to  be  burned  upon  the  altar  in  the 
same  manner  as  the  shelamim,  and  that  the  flesh  was  to  belong  to 
the  priests,  like  the  wave-breast  and  right  leg  of  the  shelamim. 
These  last  words,  it  is  true,  are  not  to  be  understood  as  signifying 
that  the  only  portions  of  the  flesh  of  the  firstlings  which  were  to  be 
given  to  the  priest  were  the  wave-breast  and  heave-leg,  and  that 
the  remainder  of  the  flesh  was  to  be  left  to  the  offerer  to  be  applied 

the  custom  of  the  Jews  themselves,  have  been  so  fully  met  by  Hengstenherg 
(Dissertations,  ii.  334  sqq.),  that  Riehm  has  nothing  to  adduce  in  reply,  except  the 
assertion  that  in  Deut.  xviii.,  where  the  revenues  of  the  priests  and  I^evites  are 
given,  there  is  nothing  said  about  the  tithe,  and  the  tithe  of  the  tithe,  and  also 
that  the  people  would  have  been  overburdened  by  a  second  tithe.  But,  apart 
from  the  fact  that  argumenta  e  silentio  generally  do  not  prove  much,  the  first 
assertion  rests  upon  the  erroneous  assumption  that  in  Deut.  xviii.  all  the  revenues 
of  the  priests  are  given  separately ;  whereas  Moses  confines  himself  to  this  general 
summary  of  the  revenues  of  the  priests  and  Levites  enumerated  singly  in  Num. 
xviii.,  "  The  firings  of  Jehovah  shall  be  the  inheritance  of  the  tribe  of  Levi, 
these  they  shall  eat,"  and  then  urges  upon  the  people  in  vers.  3-5  an  addition 
to  the  revenues  already  established.  The  second  objection  is  refuted  by  history. 
For  if  in  later  times,  when  the  people  of  Israel  had  to  pay  very  considerable 
taxes  to  the  foreign  kings  under  whose  rule  they  were  living,  they  could  give  a 
second  tenth  of  the  fruits  of  the  ground  in  addition  to  the  priests'  tithe,  as  we 
may  see  from  Tobit  i.  7,  such  a  tax  could  not  have  been  too  grievous  a  burden 
for  the  nation  in  the  time  of  its  independence  ;  to  say  nothing  of  the  fact  that 
this  second  tenth  belonged  in  great  part  to  the  donors  themselves,  since  it  was 
consumed  in  sacrificial  meals,  to  which  only  poor  and  needy  persons  were  invited, 
and  therefore  could  not  be  regarded  as  an  actual  tax. 


358  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

to  a  sacrificial  meal  (ffengstenherg)  ;  but  they  state  most  unequi- 
vocally that  the  priest  was  to  apply  the  flesh  to  a  sacrificial  meal, 
like  the  wave-breast  and  heave-leg  of  all  the  peace-offerings,  which 
the  priest  was  not  even  allowed  to  consume  with  his  own  family  at 
home,  like  ordinary  flesh,  but  to  which  the  instructions  given  for  all 
the  sacrificial  meals  were  applicable,  namely,  that  "  whoever  was 
clean  in  the  priest's  family"  might  eat  of  it  (Num.  xviii.  11),  and 
that  the  flesh  was  to  be  eaten  on  the  day  when  the  sacrifice  was 
offered  (Lev.  vii.  15),  or  at  the  latest  on  the  following  morning,  as 
in  the  case  of  the  votive  offering  (Lev.  vii.  16),  and  that  whatever 
was  left  was  to  be  burnt.  These  instructions  concerning  the  flesh 
of  the  firstlings  to  be  offered  to  the  Lord  no  more  prohibit  the 
priest  from  allowing  the  persons  who  presented  the  firstlings  to  take 
part  in  the  sacrificial  meals,  or  handing  over  to  them  some  portion 
of  the  flesh  which  belonged  to  himself  to  hold  a  sacrificial  meal, 
than  any  other  law  does ;  on  the  contrary,  the  duty  of  doing  this 
was  made  very  plain  by  the  fact  that  the  presentation  of  firstlings  is 
described  as  i^\^'^^  nnj  in  Ex.  xiii.  15,  in  the  very  first  of  the  general 
instructions  for  their  sanctification,  since  even  in  the  patriarchal 
times  the  niT  was  always  connected  with  a  sacrificial  meal  in  which 
the  offerer  participated.  Consequently  it  cannot  be  shown  that 
there  is  any  contradiction  between  Deuteronomy  and  the  earlier 
laws  with  regard  to  the  appropriation  of  the  first-bom.  The  com- 
mand to  bring  the  firstlings  of  the  sacrificial  animal,  like  all  the 
rest  of  the  sacrifices,  to  the  place  of  His  sanctuary  which  the  Lord 
would  choose,  and  to  hold  sacrificial  meals  there  with  the  tithes  of 
corn,  new  wine,  and  oil,  and  also  with  the  firstlings  of  the  flocks 
and  herds,  is  given  not  merely  to  the  laity  of  Israel,  but  to  the 
whole  of  the  people,  including  the  priests  and  Levites,  without  the 
distinction  between  the  tribe  of  Levi  and  the  other  tribes,  estab- 
lished in  the  earlier  laws,  being  even  altered,  much  less  abrogated. 
The  Israelites  were  to  bring  all  their  sacrificial  gifts  to  the  place  of 
the  sanctuary  to  be  chosen  by  the  Lord,  and  there,  not  in  all  their 
towns,  they  were  to  eat  their  votive  and  free-will  offerings  in  sacri- 
ficial meals.  This,  and  only  this,  is  what  Moses  commands  the 
people  both  here  in  vers.  7  and  17,  18,  and  also  in  chap.  xiv.  22 
sqq.  and  xv.  19  sqq.^    "  Rejoice  in  all  that  your  hand  has  acquired" 

^  If,  therefore,  the  supposed  discrepancies  between  the  law  of  Deuteronomy 
and  that  of  Exodus  and  Leviticus  concerning  the  tithes  and  firstlings  vanish 
into  mere  appearance  when  the  passages  in  Deuteronomy  are  correctly  explained, 
the  conclusions  to  which  Riehm  comes  (pp.  43  sqq.) — ^viz.  that  in  Deuteronomy 


I 
I 


I 


CHAP.  XII.  1-14.  359 

The  phrase  ^l  n^K^  (cf.  ver.  18,  chap.  xv.  10,  xxiii.  21,  xxviii.  8, 
20)  signifies  that  to  which  the  hand  is  stretched  out,  that  which  a 
man  undertakes  (synonymous  with  ^^^V^),  and  also  what  a  man 
acquires  by  his  activity :  hence  Isa.  xi.  14,  nj  niPK^Pj  what  a  man 
appropriates  to  himself  with  his  hand,  or  takes  possession  of.  "^^^^ 
before  ^3n2  is  dependent  upon  ^31!,  ^c^^,  and  ^"i^  is  construed  with 
a  double  accusative,  as  in  Gen.  xlix.  25.  The  reason  for  these 
instructions  is  given  in  vers.  8,  9,  namely,  that  this  had  not  hitherto 
taken  place,  but  that  up  to  this  day  every  one  had  done  what  he 
thought  right,  because  they  had  not  yet  come  to  the  rest  and  to  the 
inheritance  which  the  Lord  was  about  to  give  them.  The  phrase, 
"  whatsoever  is  right  in  his  own  eyes,"  is  applied  to  actions  per- 
formed according  to  a  man's  own  judgment,  rather 'than  according 
to  the  standard  of  objective  right  and  the  law  of  God  (cf.  Judg. 
xvii.  6,  xxi.  25).  The  reference  is  probably  not  so  much  to  open 
idolatry,  which  was  actually  practised,  according  to  Lev.  xvii.  7, 
Num.  XXV.,  Ezek.  xx.  16, 17,  Amos  v.  25,  26,  as  to  acts  of  illegality, 
for  which  some  excuse  might  be  found  in  the  circumstances  in 
which  they  were  placed  when  wandering  through  the  desert, — such, 
for  example,  as  the  omission  of  the  daily  sacrifice  when  the  taber- 
nacle was  not  set  up,  and  others  of  a  similar  kind. — Vers.  10-14. 
But  when  the  Israelites  had  crossed  over  the  Jordan,  and  dwelt 
peaceably  in  Canaan,  secured  against  their  enemies  round  about, 
these  irregularities  were  not  to  occur  any  more ;  but  all  the  sacri- 
fices were  to  be  offered  at  the  place  chosen  by  the  Lord  for  the 
dwelling-place  of  His  name,  and  there  the  sacrificial  meals  were  to 
be  held  with  joy  before  the  Lord.  "  The  choice  of  your  vows," 
equivalent  to  your  chosen  vows,  inasmuch  as  every  vow  was  some- 
thing special,  as  the  standing  phrase  "^"i^  vh>^  (Lev.  xxii.  21,  and 
Num.  XV.  3,  8)  distinctly  shows. — "Eejoicing  before  the  Lord," 
which  is  the  phrase  applied  in  Lev.  xxiii.  40  to  the  celebration  of 
the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  was  to  be  the  distinctive  feature  of  all  the 
sacrificial  meals  held  by  the  people  at  the  sanctuary,  as  is  repeatedly 
affirmed  (chap.  xiv.  26,  xvi.  11,  xxvi.  11,  xxvii.  7).  This  holy  joy 
in  the  participation  of  the  blessing  bestowed  by  the  Lord  was  to  be 
shared  not  only  by  sons  and  daughters,  but  also  by  slaves  (men- 

the  tithes  and  firstlings  are  no  longer  the  property  of  the  priests  and  Levites, 
and  that  all  the  laws  concerning  the  redemption  and  sale  of  them  are  abrogated 
there — are  groundless  assertions,  founded  upon  the  unproved  and  unfounded 
assumption,  that  Deuteronomy  was  intended  to  contain  a  repetition  of  the 

whole  of  the  earlier  law. 


360  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

servants  and  maid-servants),  that  tliey  too  might  taste  the  friendli- 
ness of  their  God,  and  also  by  "  the  Levite  that  is  in  your  gates^^ 
(i.e.  your  towns  and  hamlets ;  see  at  Ex.  xx.  10).  This  frequently 
recurring  description  of  the  Levites  (cf.  ver.  18,  chap.  xiv.  27,  xvi. 
11,  14,  xviii.  6,  xxvi.  12)  does  not  assume  that  they  were  homeless, 
which  would  be  at  variance  with  the  allotment  of  towns  for  them 
to  dwell  in  (Num.  xxxv.) ;  but  simply  implies  what  is  frequently 
added  in  explanation,  that  the  Levites  had  "no  part  nor  inherit- 
ance," no  share  of  the  land  as  their  hereditary  property,  and  in  this 
respect  resembled  strangers  (chap.  xiv.  21,  29,  xvi.  11,  etc.).^  And 
the  repeated  injunction  to  invite  the  Levites  to  the  sacrificial  meals 
is  not  at  variance  with  Num.  xviii.  21,  where  the  tithes  are  assigned 
to  the  tribe  of  Levi  for  their  maintenance.  For  however  ample 
this  revenue  may  have  been  according  to  the  law,  it  was  so  entirely 
dependent,  as  we  have  observed  at  p.  120,  upon  the  honesty  and 
conscientiousness  of  the  people,  that  the  Levites  might  very  easily 
be  brought  into  a  straitened  condition,  if  indifference  towards  the 
Lord  and  His  servants  should  prevail  throughout  the  nation. — In 
vers.  13,  14,  Moses  concludes  by  once  more  summing  up  these  in- 
structions in  the  admonition  to  beware  of  offering  sacrifices  in  every 
place  that  they  might  choose,  the  burnt-offering,  as  the  leading 
sacrifice,  being  mentioned  instar  omnium. 

Vers.  15-19.  But  if  these  instructions  were  really  to  be  observed 
by  the  people  in  Canaan,  it  was  necessary  that  the  law  which  had 
been  given  with  reference  to  the  journey  through  the  wilderness, 
viz.  that  no  animal  should  be  slain  anywhere  else  than  at  the  taber- 
nacle in  the  same  manner  as  a  slain-offering  (Lev.  xvii.  3-6),  should 
be  abolished.  This  is  done  in  ver.  lo,  where  Moses,  in  direct  con- 
nection with  what  goes  before,  allows  the  people,  as  an  exception 
(PI,  only)  to  the  rules  laid  down  in  vers.  4-14,  to  kill  and  eat  flesh 
for  their  own  food  according  to  all  their  soul's  desire.  Flesh  that 
was  slaughtered  for  food  could  be  eaten  by  both  clean  and  unclean, 
such  for  example  as  the  roebuck  and  the  hart,  animals  which  could 
not  be  offered  in  sacrifice,  and  in  which,  therefore,  the  distinction 
between  clean  and  unclean  on  the  part  of  the  eaters  did  not  come 
into  consideration  at  all. — Ver.  16.  But  blood  was  forbidden  to  be 

^  The  explanation  given  by  De  Wette^  and  adopted  by  Riehm,  of  the  expres- 
sion, *'  the  Levite  that  is  within  thy  gates,"  is  perfectly  arbitrary  and  unfounded : 
viz.  that  "  the  Levites  did  not  live  any  longer  in  the  towns  assigned  them  by 
the  earlier  laws,  but  were  scattered  about  in  the  different  towns  of  the  other 
tribes." 


CHAP.  XII.  20-31.  361 

eaten  (see  at  Lev.  xvii.  10  sqq.).  The  blood  was  to  be  poured  out 
upon  the  earth  Kke  water,  that  it  might  suck  it  in,  receive  it  into 
its  bosom  (see  voh  ii.  p,  410). — Yers.  17  sqq.  Sacrificial  meals  could 
only  be  held  at  the  sanctuary ;  and  the  Levite  was  not  to  be  for- 
gotten or  neglected  in  connection  with  them  (see  at  vers.  6,  7,  and 
12).     /'^^n  NP,  "  thou  must  not/^  as  in  chap.  vii.  22. 

Vers.  20-31.  These  rules  were  still  to  remain  in  force,  even 
when  God  should  extend  the  borders  of  the  land  in  accordance  with 
His  promise.  This  extension  relates  partly  to  the  gradual  but  com- 
plete extermination  of  the  Canaanites  (chap.  vii.  22,  comp.  with 
Ex.  xxiii.  27-33),  and  partly  to  the  extension  of  the  territory  of  the 
Israelites  beyond  the  limits  of  Canaan  Proper,  in  accordance  with 
the  divine  promise  in  Gen.  xv.  18.  The  words  "  as  He  hath  spoken 
to  thee"  refer  primarily  to  Ex.  xxiii.  27-33.  (On  ver.  20b,  see 
ver.  15.) — In  ver.  21a,  "  if  the  place  .  ,  ,he  too  far  from  thee^"*  sup- 
plies the  reason  for  the  repeal  of  the  law  in  Lev.  xvii.  3,  which  re- 
stricted all  slaughtering  to  the  place  of  the  sanctuary.  The  words 
"  kill  .  ,  .  as  I  have  commanded  thee"  refer  back  to  ver.  15. — 
Ver.  22.  Only  the  flesh  that  was  slaughtered  was  to  be  eaten  as 
the  hart  and  the  roebuck  (cf.  ver.  15),  i.e.  was  not  to  be  made  into 
a  sacrifice,  nn^,  together,  i.e.  the  one  just  the  same  as  the  other,  as 
in  Isa.  X.  8,  without  the  clean  necessarily  eating  along  with  the 
unclean. — Vers.  23,  24.  The  law  relating  to  the  blood,  as  in  ver. 
16. — "  Be  strong  not  to  eat  the  blood,"  i.e.  stedfastly  resist  the  temp- 
tation to  eat  it. — Ver.  25.  On  the  promise  for  doing  what  was  right 
in  the  eyes  of  the  Lord,  see  chap.  vi.  18. — In  vers.  26,  27,  the 
command  to  offer  all  the  holy  gifts  at  the  place  chosen  by  the  Lord 
is  enforced  once  more,  as  in  vers.  6,  11,  17,  18  ;  also  to  prepare 
the  sacrifices  at  His  altar.  ^T"]!?.,  the  holy  offerings  prescribed  in 
the  law,  as  in  Num.  xviii.  8 ;  see  at  Lev.  xxi.  22.  The  "  votive 
offerings'*  are  mentioned  in  connection  with  these,  because  vows 
proceeded  from  a  spontaneous  impulse.  ^?  ^""n^  ^^^.,  "  which  are  to 
thee,"  are  binding  upon  thee.  In  ver.  27,  "  the  flesh  and  the  blood'* 
are  in  opposition  to  "  thy  burnt-offerings  :"  "  thy  burnt-offerings, 
namely  the  flesh  and  blood  of  them,"  thou  shalt  prepare  at  the 
altar  of  Jehovah ;  i.e.  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  burnt-offerings 
were  to  be  placed  upon  and  against  the  altar  (see  at  Lev.  i.  5-9). 
Of  the  slain-offerings,  i.e.  the  shelamim,  the  blood  was  to  be  poured 
out  against  the  altar  (Lev.  iii.  2,  8, 13)  ;  "  the  flesh  thou  canst  eat" 
(cf.  Lev.  vii.  11  sqq.).  There  is  no  ground  for  seeking  an  anti- 
thesis in  ^SB^"",  as  Knobel  does,  to  the  \>'}\  in  the  sacrificial  ritual. 


362  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

The  indefinite  expression  may  be  explained  from  the  retrospective 
allusion  to  ver.  24  and  the  purely  suggestive  character  of  the  whole 
passage,  the  thing  itself  being  supposed  to  be  sufficiently  known 
from  the  previous  laws. — Ver.  28.  The  closing  admonition  is  a 
further  expansion  of  ver.  25  (see  at  eh.  xi.  21). — In  vers.  29-31, 
the  exhortation  goes  back  to  the  beginning  again,  viz.  to  a  warning 
against  the  Canaanitish  idolatry  (cf.  vers.  2  sqq.).  When  the  Lord 
had  cut  off  the  nations  of  Canaan  from  before  the  Israelites,  they 
were  to  take  heed  that  they  did  not  get  into  the  snare  behind  them, 
Le,  into  the  sin  of  idolatry,  which  had  plunged  the  Canaanites  into 
destruction  (cf.  chap.  vii.  16,  25).  The  clause  "  after  they  he 
destroyed  from  before  thee "  is  not  mere  tautology,  but  serves  to 
depict  the  danger  of  the  snare  most  vividly  before  their  eyes.  The 
second  clause,  "  that  thou  inquire  not  after  them  "  (their  gods),  etc., 
explains  more  fully  to  the  Israelites  the  danger  which  threatened 
them.  This  danger  was  so  far  a  pressing  one,  that  the  whole  of 
the  heathen  world  was  animated  with  the  conviction,  that  to  neglect 
the  gods  of  a  land  would  be  sure  to  bring  misfortune  (cf .  2  Kings 
xvii.  26). — ^Ver.  31a,  like  ver.  4,  with  the  reason  assigned  in  ver. 
316  :  "  for  the  Canaanites  prepare  ip^^,  as  in  ver.  27)  all  kinds  of 
abominations  for  their  gods,"  Le»  present  offerings  to  these,  which 
Jehovah  hates  and  abhors ;  they  even  burn  their  children  to  their 
idols — for  example,  to  Moloch  (see  at  Lev.  xviii.  21). 

Punishment  of  Idolater s^  and  Tempters  to  Idolatry, — Chap.  xiii. 

Ver.  1.  (chap.  xii.  32).  The  admonition  to  observe  the  whole 
law,  without  adding  to  it  or  taking  from  it  (cf.  chap.  iv.  2),  is 
regarded  by  many  commentators  as  the  conclusion  of  the  previous 
chapter.  But  it  is  more  correct  to  understand  it  as  an  intermediate 
link,  closing  what  goes  before,  and  introductory  to  what  follows. 
Strictly  speaking,  the  warning  against  inclining  to  the  idolatry  of 
the  Canaanites  (chap.  xii.  29-31)  forms  a  transition  from  the  en- 
forcement of  the  true  mode  of  worshipping  Jehovah  to  the  laws 
relating  to  tempters  to  idolatry  and  worshippers  of  idols  (chap.  xiii.). 
The  Israelites  were  to  cut  off  not  only  the  tempters  to  idolatry, 
but  those  who  had  been  led  astray  to  idolatry  also.  Three  different 
cases  are  mentioned. 

Vers.  2-6  (1-5).  TDiq  first  case.  If  a  prophet,  or  one  who  had 
dreams,  should  rise  up  to  summon  to  the  worship  of  other  gods, 
with  signs  and  wonders  which  came  to  pass,  the  Israelites  were  not 
to  hearken  to  his  words,  but  to  put  him  to  death.   The  introduction 


I 


CHAP.  XIII.  2-6.  363 

of  Di^n  thhy  "  a  dreamer  of  dreams"  along  with  the  prophet,  answers 
to  the  two  media  of  divine  revelation,  the  vision  and  the  dream,  by 
which,  according  to  Num.  xii.  6,  God  made  known  His  will.  With 
regard  to  the  signs  and  wonders  (mopheth,  see  at  Ex.  iv.  21)  with 
which  such  a  prophet  might  seek  to  accredit  his  higher  mission,  it 
is  taken  for  granted  that  they  come  to  pass  (i^S2)  ;  yet  for  all  that, 
the  Israelites  were  to  give  no  heed  to  such  a  prophet,  to  walk  after 
other  gods.  It  follows  from  this,  that  the  person  had  not  been  sent 
by  God,  but  was  a  false  prophet,  and  that  the  signs  and  wonders 
which  he  gave  were  not  wonders  effected  by  God,  but  a-rjfjLela  koI 
repara  ^fr€vSov^  ("  lying  signs  and  wonders,"  2  Thess.  ii.  9)  ;  i.e,  not 
merely  seeming  miracles,  but  miracles  wrought  in  the  power  of  the 
wicked  one,  Satan,  the  possibility  and  reality  of  which  even  Christ 
attests  (Matt.  xxiv.  24). — The  word  "^bs?,  saying,  is  dependent  upon 
the  principal  verb  of  the  sentence :  "  if  a  prophet  rise  up  ...  . 
saying.  We  will  go  after  other  gods." — Ver.  4.  God  permitted  false 
prophets  to  rise  up  with  such  wonders,  to  try  the  Israelites,  whether 
they  loved  Him,  the  Lord  their  God,  with  all  their  heart.  (HDJ  as 
in  Gen.  xxii.  1.)  I3''?i]^  ^?^.^ilj  whether  ye  are  loving,  i.e.  faithfully 
maintain  your  love  to  the  Lord.  It  is  evident  from  this,  "  that 
however  great  the  importance  attached  to  signs  and  wonders,  they 
were  not  to  be  regarded  among  the  Israelites,  either  as  the  highest 
test,  or  as  absolutely  decisive,  but  that  there  was  a  certainty  in 
Israel,  which  was  so  much  the  more  certain  and  firm  than  any  proof 
from  miracles  could  be,  that  it  might  be  most  decidedly  opposed  to 
it"  (Baumgarten).  This  certainty,  however,  was  not  "  the  know- 
ledge of  Jehovah,"  as  B.  supposes  ;  but  as  Luther  correctly  observes, 
"  the  word  of  God,  which  had  already  been  received,  and  confirmed 
by  its  own  signs,"  and  which  the  Israelites  were  to  preserve  and  hold 
fast,  without  adding  or  subtracting  anything.  "  In  opposition  to 
such  a  word,  no  prophets  were  to  be  received,  although  they  rained 
signs  and  wonders ;  not  even  an  angel  from  heaven,  as  Paul  says 
in  Gal.  i.  8."  The  command  to  hearken  to  the  prophets  whom  the 
Lord  would  send  at  a  future  time  (chap,  xviii.  18  sqq.),  is  not  at 
variance  with  this  :  for  even  their  announcements  were  to  be  judged 
according  to  the  standard  of  the  fixed  word  of  God  that  had  been 
already  given ;  and  so  far  as  they  proclaimed  anything  new,  the 
fact  that  what  they  announced  did  not  occur  was  to  be  the  criterion 
that  they  had  not  spoken  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  but  in  that  of 
other  gods  (chap,  xviii.  21,  22),  so  thai  even  there  the  signs  and 
wonders  of  the  prophets  are  not  made  the  criteria  of  their  divine 


364  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

mission. — Vers.  5,  6.  Israel  was  to  adhere  firmly  to  the  Lord  its 
God  (cf .  chap.  iv.  4),  and  to  put  to  death  the  prophet  who  preached 
apostasy  from  Jehovah,  the  Kedeemer  of  Israel  out  of  the  slave- 
house  of  Egypt.  '^n'''^.'Iir',  "  to  force  thee  from  the  way  in  which 
Jehovah  hath  commanded  thee  to  walk."  The  execution  of  seducers 
to  idolatry  is  enjoined  upon  the  people,  i.e.  the  whole  community, 
not  upon  single  individuals,  but  upon  the  authorities  who  had  to 
maintain  and  administer  justice.  "  So  shall  thou  put  the  evil  away 
from  the  midst  of  thee^  Tf!^  is  neuter,  as  we  may  see  from  chap, 
xvii.  7,  as  comp.  with  ver.  2.  The  formula,  "  so  shalt  thou  put  the 
evil  away  from  the  midst  of  thee,"  which  occurs  again  in  chap.  xvii. 
7,  12,  xix.  19,  xxi.  21,  xxii.  21,  22,  24,  and  xxiv.  7  (cf.  chap.  xix. 
13  and  xxi.  9),  belongs  to  the  hortatory  character  of  Deuteronomy, 
in  accordance  with  which  a  reason  is  given  for  all  the  command- 
ments, and  the  observance  of  them  is  urged  upon  the  congregation 
as  a  holy  affair  of  the  heart,  which  could  not  be  expected  in  the 
objective  legislation  of  the  earlier  books. 

Vers.  7-12  (6-11).  The  second  case  was  when  the  temptation 
to  idolatry  proceeded  from  the  nearest  blood-relations  and  friends. 
The  clause,  "  son  of  thy  mother,"  is  not  intended  to  describe  the 
brother  as  a  step-brother,  but  simply  to  bring  out  the  closeness  of 
the  fraternal  relation ;  like  the  description  of  the  wife  as  the  wife 
of  thy  bosom,  who  lies  in  thy  bosom,  rests  upon  thy  breast  (as  in 
chap,  xxviii.  54 ;  Micah  vii.  5),  and  of  the  friend  as  "  thy  friend 
which  is  as  thine  own  soul,"  Le.  whom  thou  lovest  as  much  as  thy  life 
(cf.  1  Sam.  xviii.  1,  3).  "irisa  belongs  to  ri^p^ :  if  the  temptation 
occurred  in  secret,  and  therefore  the  fact  might  be  hidden  from 
others.  The  power  of  love  and  relationship,  which  flesh  and  blood 
find  it  hard  to  resist,  is  placed  here  in  contrast  with  the  supposed 
higher  or  divine  authority  of  the  seducers.  As  the  persuasion  was 
already  very  seductive,  from  the  fact  that  it  proceeded  from  the 
nearest  blood-relations  and  most  intimate  friends,  and  was  offered 
in  secret,  it  might  become  still  more  so  from  the  fact  that  it  recom- 
mended the  worship  of  a  deity  that  had  nothing  in  common  with 
the  forbidden  idols  of  Canaan,  and  the  worship  of  which,  therefore, 
might  appear  of  less  consequence,  or  commend  itself  by  the  charm  of 
peculiarity  and  novelty.  To  prevent  this  deceptive  influence  of  sin, 
it  is  expressly  added  in  ver.  8  (7),  "  of  the  gods  nigh  unto  thee  or  far 
^ff  f'^01^  thee,  from  the  one  end  of  the  earth  even  unto  the  other  end  of 
the  earth^^  i.e.  whatever  gods  there  might  be  upon  the  whole  circuit 
of  the  earth. — Vers.  9  (8)  sqq.  To  such  persuasion  Israel  was  not  to 


CHAP.  XIII.  13-19.  365 

yield,  nor  were  they  to  spare  the  tempters.  The  accumulation  of 
synonyms  (pity,  spare,  conceal)  serves  to  make  the  passage  more 
emphatic.  HDS,  to  cover,  i.e.  to  keep  secret,  conceal.  They  were 
to  put  him  to  death  without  pity,  viz.  to  stone  him  (cf.  Lev.  xx.  2). 
That  the  execution  even  in  this  case  was  to  be  carried  out  by  the 
regular  authorities,  is  evident  from  the  words,  ''  thy  hand  shall  be 
first  against  him  to  put  him  to  death,  and  the  hand  of  all  the  people 
afterwards,"  which  presuppose  the  judicial  procedure  prescribed  in 
chap.  xvii.  7,  that  the  witnesses  were  to  cast  the  first  stones  at  the 
person  condemned. — Ver.  12.  This  was  to  be  done,  and  all  Israel 
was  to  hear  it  and  fear,  that  no  such  wickedness  should  be  performed 
any  more  in  the  congregation.  The  fear  of  punishment,  which  is 
given  here  as  the  ultimate  end  of  the  punishment  itself,  is  not  to  be 
regarded  as  the  principle  lying  at  the  foundation  of  the  law,  but 
simply,  as  Calvin  expresses  it,  as  "  the  utility  and  fruit  of  severity," 
one  reason  for  carrying  out  the  law,  which  is  not  to  be  confounded 
with  the  so-called  deterrent  theory,  i.e.  the  attempt  to  deter  from 
crime  by  the  mode  of  punishing  (see  my  Archaologie^  ii.  p.  262). 

Vers.  13-19  (12-18).  The  third  case  is  that  of  a  town  that  had 
been  led  away  to  idolatry.  "  If  tJiou  shalt  hear  in  one  of  thy  cities." 
^O^r^,  not  de  una,  of  one,  which  V^f  with  3  never  can  mean,  and 
does  not  mean  even  in  Job  xxvi.  14.  The  thought  is  not  that  they 
would  hear  in  one  city  about  another,  as  though  one  city  had  the 
oversight  over  another ;  but  there  is  an  inversion  in  the  sentence, 
"  if  thou  hear,  that  in  one  of  thy  cities  .  .  .  worthless  men  have  risen 
up,  and  led  the  inhabitants  astray  to  serve  strange  gods."  "'^^r?  intro- 
duces the  substance  of  what  is  heard,  which  follows  in  ver.  14.     XV"" 

7  TT 

merely  signifies  to  rise  up,  to  go  forth.  ^S^lip^,  out  of  the  midst  of 
the  people. — ^Yer.  15  (14).  Upon  this  report  the  people  as  a  whole, 
of  course  through  their  rulers,  were  to  examine  closely  into  the  affair 
(ntD^iij  an  adverb,  as  in  chap.  ix.  21),  whether  the  word  was  estab- 
lished as  truth,  i.e.  the  thing  was  founded  in  truth  (cf .  chap.  xvii.  4, 
xxii.  20)  ;  and  if  it  really  were  so,  they  were  to  smite  the  inhabit- 
ants of  that  town  with  the  edge  of  the  sword  (cf.  Gen.  xxxiv.  26), 
putting  the  town  and  all  that  was  in  it  under  the  ban.  "  All  that  is 
in  it "  relates  to  men,  cattle,  and  the  material  property  of  the  town, 
and  not  to  men  alone  (Schultz).  The  clause  from  "  destroying"  to 
"therein"  is  a  more  minute  definition  of  the  punishment  introduced 
as  a  parenthesis ;  for  "  the  cattle  thereof,"  which  follows,  is  also 
governed  by  "  thou  shalt  smite."  The  ban  was  to  be  executed  in  all 
its  severity  as  upon  an  idolatrous  city :  man  and  beast  were  to  be 


366  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

put  to  death  without  reserve ;  and  its  booty,  i.e.  whatever  was  to  be 
found  in  it  as  booty — all  material  goods,  therefore — were  to  be  heaped 
together  in  the  market,  and  burned  along  with  the  city  itself. 
nirT'p  773  (Eng.  Ver.  "  every  whit,  for  the  Lord  thy  God")  signifies 
"  as  a  whole  offering  for  the  Lord'^  (see  Lev.  vi.  15,  16),  i.e.  it  was 
to  be  sanctified  to  Him  entirely  by  being  destroyed.  The  town  was 
to  continue  an  eternal  hill  (or  heap  of  ruins),  never  to  be  built  up 
again. — Yer.  18  (17).  To  enforce  this  command  still  more  strongly, 
it  is  expressly  stated,  that  of  all  that  was  burned,  nothing  whatever 
was  to  cleave  or  remain  hanging  to  the  hand  of  Israel,  that  the  Lord 
might  turn  from  His  wrath  and  have  compassion  upon  the  nation,  i.e. 
not  punish  the  sin  of  one  town  upon  the  nation  as  a  whole,  but  have 
mercy  upon  it  and  multiply  it, — make  up  the  diminution  consequent 
upon  the  destruction  of  the  inhabitants  of  that  town,  and  so  fulfil  the 
promise  given  to  the  fathers  of  the  multiplication  of  their  seed. — 
Ver.  19  (18).  Jehovah  would  do  this  if  Israel  hearkened  to  His  voice, 
to  do  what  was  right  in  His  eyes.  In  what  way  the  appropriation 
of  property  laid  under  the  ban  brought  the  wrath  of  God  upon  the 
whole  congregation,  is  shown  by  the  example  of  Achan  (Josh.  vii.). 

Avoidance  of  the  Mourning  Customs  of  the  Heathen,  and  Unclean 
Food,     Application  of  the  Tithe  of  Fruits. — Chap.  xiv. 

Vers.  1-21.  The  Israelites  were  not  only  to  suffer  no  idolatry 
to  rise  up  in  their  midst,  but  in  all  their  walk  of  life  to  show  them- 
selves as  a  holy  nation  of  the  Lord  ;  and  neither  to  disfigure  their 
bodies  by  passionate  expressions  of  sorrow  for  the  dead  (vers.  1  and 
2),  nor  to  defile  themselves  by  unclean  food  (vers.  3-21).  Both  of 
these  were  opposed  to  their  calling.  To  bring  this  to  their  mind, 
Moses  introduces  the  laws  which  follow  with  the  words,  "  ye  are 
children  to  the  Lord  your  God."  The  divine  sonship  of  Israel  was 
founded  upon  its  election  and  calling  as  the  holy  nation  of  Jehovah, 
which  is  regarded  in  the  Old  Testament  not  as  generation  by  the 
Spirit  of  God,  but  simply  as  an  adoption  springing  out  of  the  free 
love  of  God,  as  the  manifestation  of  paternal  love  on  the  part  of 
Jehovah  to  Israel,  which  binds  the  son  to  obedience,  reverence,  and 
childlike  trust  towards  a  Creator  and  Father,  who  would  train  it 
up  into  a  holy  people  (see  vol.  i.  p.  457).  The  laws  in  ver.  Ih  are 
simply  a  repetition  of  Lev.  xix.  28  and  xxi.  5.  ^07^  with  reference 
to,  or  on  account  of,  a  dead  person,  is  more  expressive  than  K^SJ? 
(for  a  soul)  in  Lev.  xix.  28.  The  reason  assigned  for  this  com- 
mand in  ver.  2  (as  in  chap.  vii.  6)  is  simply  an  emphatic  elucida- 


CHAP.  XIV.  22-29.  367 

tion  of  the  first  clause  of  ver.  1.  (On  the  substance  of  the  verse, 
see  Ex.  xix.  5,  6.)  —  Vers.  3-20.  With  reference  to  food,  the 
Israelites  were  to  eat  nothing  whatever  that  was  abominable.  In 
explanation  of  this  prohibition,  the  laws  of  Lev.  xi.  relating  to 
clean  and  unclean  animals  are  repeated  in  all  essential  points  in 
vers.  4-20  (for  the  exposition,  see  at  Lev.  xi.);  also  in  ver.  21  the 
prohibition  against  eating  any  animal  that  had  fallen  down  dead 
(as  in  Ex.  xxxii.  30  and  Lev.  xvii.  15),  and  against  boiling  a  kid 
in  its  mother's  milk  (as  in  Ex.  xxiii.  19). 

Vers.  22-29.  As  the  Israelites  were  to  sanctify  their  food,  on 
the  one  hand,  positively  by  abstinence  from  everything  unclean,  so 
were  they,  on  the  other  hand,  to  do  so  negatively  by  delivering  the 
tithes  and  firstlings  at  the  place  where  the  Lord  would  cause  His 
name  to  dwell,  and  by  holding  festal  meals  on  the  occasion,  and 
rejoicing  there  before  Jehovah  their  God.  This  law  is  introduced 
with  the  general  precept,  "  Tliou  sJialt  tithe  all  the  produce  of  thy 
seed  which  groweth  out  of  the  field  (^5VJ  construes  with  an  accusative, 
as  in  Gen.  ix.  10,  etc.)  year  hy  year"  (ni^  njB^j  i.e.  every  year;  cf. 
Ewald,  §  313,  a.),  which  recalls  the  earlier  laws  concerning  the  tithe 
(Lev.  xxvii.  30,  and  Num.  xviii.  21,  26  sqq.),  without  repeating 
them  one  by  one,  for  the  purpose  of  linking  on  the  injunction  to 
celebrate  sacrificial  meals  at  the  sanctuary  from  the  tithes  and 
firstlings.  Moses  had  already  directed  (chap.  xii.  6  sqq.)  that  all 
the  sacrificial  meals  should  take  place  at  the  sanctuary,  and  had 
then  alluded  to  the  sacrificial  meals  to  be  prepared  from  the  tithes, 
though  only  casually,  because  he  intended  to  speak  of  them  more 
fully  afterwards.  This  he  does  here,  and  includes  the  firstlings 
also,  inasmuch  as  the  presentation  of  them  was  generally  associated 
with  that  of  the  tithes,  though  only  casually,  as  he  intends  to  revert 
to  the  firstlings  again,  which  he  does  in  chap.  xv.  19  sqq.  The 
connection  between  the  tithes  of  the  fruits  of  the  ground  and  the 
firstlings  of  the  cattle  which  were  devoted  to  the  sacrificial  meals, 
and  the  tithes  and  first-fruits  which  were  to  be  delivered  to  the 
Levites  and  priests,  we  have  already  discussed  at  chap.  xii.  (p.  356). 
The  sacrificial  meals  were  to  be  held  before  the  Lord,  in  the  place 
where  He  caused  His  name  to  dwell  (see  at  chap.  xii.  5),  that  Israel 
might  learn  to  fear  Jehovali  its  God  always;  not,  however,  as 
Schultz  supposes,  that  by  the  confession  of  its  dependence  upon 
Him  it  might  accustom  itself  more  and  more  to  the  feeling  of 
dependence.  For  the  fear  of  the  Lord  is  not  merely  a  feeling  of 
dependence  upon   Him,  but   also   includes  the  notion  of   divine 


368  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

blessedness,  which  is  the  predominant  idea  here,  as  the  sacrificial 
meals  were  to  furnish  the  occasion  and  object  of  the  rejoicing 
before  the  Lord.  The  true  meaning  therefore  is,  that  Israel  might 
rejoice  with  holy  reverence  in  the  fellowship  of  its  God. — Vers.  24 
sqq.  In  the  land  of  Canaan,  however,  where  the  people  would  be 
scattered  over  a  great  extent  of  countr}',  there  would  be  many  for 
whom  the  fulfilment  of  this  command  would  be  very  difficult — 
would,  in  fact,  appear  almost  impossible.  To  meet  this  diflBculty, 
permission  was  given  for  those  who  liyed  at  a  great  distance  from 
the  sanctuary  to  sell  the  tithes  at  home,  provided  they  could  not 
convey  them  in  kind,  and  then  to  spend  the  money  so  obtained  in 
the  purchase  of  the  things  required  for  the  sacrificial  meals  at  the 
place  of  the  sanctuar}'.  ^p  ^3"}^  *3,  "  if  the  way  he  too  great  (too 
far)  for  thee"  etc.,  sc.  for  the  delivery  of  the  tithe.  The  paren- 
thetical clause,  "if  Jehovah  thy  God  shall  bless  thee,"  hardly  means 
"if  He  shall  extend  thy  territory"  (Knobel),  but  if  He  shall  bless 
thee  by  plentiful  produce  from  the  field  and  the  cattle. — Ver.  25. 
"  Turn  it  into  money"  lit.  "  give  it  up  for  silver,"  sc.  the  produce  of 
the  tithe ;  "  and  bind  the  silver  in  thy  hand,"  const,  proegnans  for 
"  bind  it  in  a  purse  and  take  it  in  thy  hand  ....  and  give  the 
silver  for  all  that  thy  soul  desireth,  for  oxen  and  small  cattle,  for 
wine  and  strong  drink,"  to  hold  a  joyous  meal,  to  which  the  Levite 
was  also  to  be  invited  (as  in  chap.  xii.  12,  18,  and  19). — Vers. 
28  and  29.  Ever}'  third  year,  on  the  other  hand,  they  were  to 
separate  the  whole  of  the  tithe  from  the  year's  produce  ("bring 
forth,"  sc.  from  the  granary),  and  leave  it  in  their  gates  (i.e.  their 
towns),  and  feed  the  Le^^tes,  the  strangers,  and  the  widows  and 
orphans  with  it.  They  were  not  to  take  it  to  the  sanctuary,  there- 
fore ;  but  according  to  chap.  xxvi.  12  sqq^  after  bringing  it  out, 
were  to  make  confession  to  the  Lord  of  what  they  had  done,  and 
pray  for  His  blessing.  "^<  the  end  of  three  years:"  i.e.  when  the 
third  year,  namely  the  civil  year,  which  closed  with  the  harvest 
(see  at  Ex.  xxiii.  16),  had  come  to  an  end.  This  regulation  as  to 
the  time  was  founded  upon  the  observance  of  the  sabbatical  year, 
as  we  may  see  from  chap.  xv.  1,  where  the  seventh  year  is  no  other 
than  the  sabbatical  year.  Twice,  therefore,  within  the  period  of  a 
sabbatical  year,  namely  in  the  third  and  sixth  years,  the  tithe  set 
apart  for  a  sacrificial  meal  was  not  to  be  eaten  at  the  sanctuary, 
but  to  be  used  in  the  different  towns  of  the  land  in  providing  festal 
meals  for  those  who  had  no  possessions,  viz.  the  Levites,  strangers, 
widows,  and  orphans.     Consequently  this  tithe  cannot  properly  be 


CHAP.  XV.  1-11.  369 

called  the  "third  tithe,"  as  it  is  by  many  of  the  Eabbins,  but  rather 
the  "  poor  tithe,"  as  it  was  simply  in  the  way  of  applying  it  that  it 
differed  from  the  "  second  "  (see  Hettinger ,  de  decimis,  exerc,  viii. 
pp.  182  sqq.,  and  my  Archdol,  i.  p.  339).  As  an  encouragement 
to  carry  out  these  instructions,  Moses  closes  in  ver.  29  witli  an 
allusion  to  the  di\'ine  blessing  which  would  follow  their  observance. 

On  the  Year  of  Release,  the  Emancipation  of  Hebrew  Slaves,  and  the 
Sanctijicaiion  of  the  First-born  of  Cattle. — Chap.  xv. 

Vers.  1-11.  On  the  Year  of  Kelease. — The  first  two  regu- 
lations in  this  chapter,  viz.  vers.  1-11  and  12-18,  follow  simply 
upon  the  law  concerning  the  poor  tithe  in  chap.  xiv.  28,  29.  The 
Israelites  were  not  only  to  cause  those  who  had  no  possessions 
(Levites,  strangers,  widows,  and  orphans)  to  refresh  themselves  with 
the  produce  of  their  inheritance,  but  they  were  not  to  force  and 
oppress  the  poor.  Debtors  especially  were  not  to  be  deprived  of 
the  blessings  of  the  sabbatical  year  (vers.  1-6).  ^^At  the  end  of  seven 
years  thou  shall  make  a  released  The  expression,  "  at  the  end  of 
seven  years,"  is  to  be  understood  in  the  same  way  as  the  correspond- 
ing phrase,  "  at  the  end  of  three  years,"  in  chap.  xiv.  28.  The  end 
of  seven  years,  t.e.  of  the  seven  years'  cycle  formed  by  the  sab- 
batical year,  is  mentioned  as  the  time  when  debts  that  had  been  con- 
tracted were  usually  wiped  off  or  demanded,  after  the  year's  harvest 
had  been  gathered  in  (cf .  chap.  xxxi.  10,  acccording  to  which  the  feast 
of  Tabernacles  occurred  at  the  end  of  the  year).  "^^P?^,  from  ODB', 
to  let  lie,  to  let  go  (cf.  Ex.  xxiii.  11),  does  not  signify  a  remission 
of  the  debt,  the  relinquishing  of  all  claim  for  payment,  as  Philo 
and  the  Talmudists  affirm,  but  simply  lengthening  the  term,  not 
pressing  for  payment.  This  is  the  explanation  in  ver.  2  :  "  This  is 
the  manner  of  the  release  ^  (shemittah)  :  cf.  chap.  xix.  4 ;  1  Kings  ix. 
15.  **  Every  oumer  of  a  loan  of  his  hand  shall  release  (leave)  what 
he  has  lent  to  his  neighbour ;  he  shall  not  press  his  neighbour,  and 
indeed  his  brother ;  for  they  have  proclaimed  release  for  Jehovah^ 
As  CiDS^  (release)  points  unmistakeably  back  to  Ex.  xxiii.  11,  it  must 
be  interpreted  in  the  same  manner  here  as  there.  And  as  it  is  not 
used  there  to  denote  the  entire  renunciation  of  a  field  or  possession, 
so  here  it  cannot  mean  the  entire  renunciation  of  what  had  been 
lent,  but  simply  leaving  it,  i,e.  not  pressing  for  it  during  the  seventh 
year.  This  is  favoured  by  what  follows,  "  thou  shalt  not  press  thy 
neighbour,'^  which  simply  forbids  an  unreserved  demand,  but  does 
not  require  that  the  debt  should  be  remitted  or  presented  to  the 

pent. — VOL.  III.  j  A 


370  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

debtor  (see  also  Bdhr,  Spnbolik,  ii.  pp.  570-1).  "  The  loan  of  the 
hand  :"  what  the  hand  has  lent  to  another.  "  The  master  of  the 
loan  of  the  hand :"  i,e.  the  owner  of  a  loan,  the  lender.  "  His 
brother"  defines  with  greater  precision  the  idea  of  "  a  neighbour.'* 
Calling  a  release,  presupposes  that  the  sabbatical  year  was  publicly 
proclaimed,  like  the  year  of  jubilee  (Lev.  xxv.  9).  ^"^ij  is  imper- 
sonal ("  they  call"),  as  in  Gen.  xi.  9  and  xvi.  14.  "  Foi"  Jehovah :" 
i.e.  in  honour  of  Jehovah,  sanctified  to  Him,  as  in  Ex.  xii.  42. — This 
law  points  back  to  the  institution  of  the  sabbatical  year  in  Ex. 
xxiii.  10,  Lev.  xxv.  2-7,  though  it  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  an  ap- 
pendix to  the  law  of  the  sabbatical  year,  or  an  expansion  of  it,  but 
simply  as  an  exposition  of  what  was  already  impHed  in  the  main 
provision  of  that  law,  viz.  that  the  cultivation  of  the  land  should 
be  suspended  in  the  sabbatical  year.  If  no  harvest  was  gathered 
in,  and  even  such  produce  as  had  grown  without  sowing  was  to  be 
left  to  the  poor  and  the  beasts  of  the  field,  the  landowner  could 
have  no  income  from  which  to  pay  his  debts.  The  fact  that  the 
"  sabbatical  year^  is  not  expressly  mentioned,  may  be  accounted  for 
on  the  ground,  that  even  in  the  principal  law  itself  this  name  does 
not  occur ;  and  it  is  simply  commanded  that  every  seventh  year 
there  was  to  be  a  sabbath  of  rest  to  the  land  (Lev.  xxv.  4).  In  the 
subsequent  passages  in  which  it  is  referred  to  (ver.  9  and  chap.  xxxi. 
10),  it  is  still  not  called  a  sabbatical  year,  but  simply  the  "  year  of 
release,"  and  that  not  merely  with  reference  to  debtors,  but  also  with 
reference  to  the  release  (shemittah)  to  be  allowed  to  the  field  (Ex. 
xxiii.  11). — Ver.  3.  The  foreigner  thou  mayest  press,  but  what  thou 
hast  with  thy  brother  shall  thy  hand  let  go.  ''")3J  is  a  stranger  of 
another  nation,  standing  in  no  inward  relation  to  Israel  at  all,  and 
is  to  be  distinguished  from  "13,  the  foreigner  who  lived  among  the 
Israelites,  who  had  a  claim  upon  their  protection  and  pity.  This 
rule  breathes  no  hatred  of  foreigners,  but  simply  allows  the  Israel- 
ites the  right  of  every  creditor  to  demand  his  debts,  and  enforce  the 
demand  upon  foreigners,  even  in  the  sabbatical  year.  There  was 
no  severity  in  this,  because  foreigners  could  get  their  ordinary  in- 
come in  the  seventh  year  as  well  as  in  any  other. — Ver.  4.  "  Onli/  that 
there  shall  be  no  poor  with  theeV  rrtri^  is  jussive,  like  the  foregoing 
imperfects.  The  meaning  in  this  connection  is,  "  Thou  needest  not 
to  remit  a  debt  to  foreigners  in  the  seventh  year ;  thou  hast  only  to 
take  care  that  there  is  no  poor  man  with  or  among  thee,  that  thou 
dost  not  cause  or  increase  their  poverty,  by  oppressing  the  brethren 
who  have  borrowed  of  thee."    Understood  in  this  way,  the  sentence 


CHAP.  XV.  12-18.  371 

is  not  at  all  at  variance  with  ver.  11,  where  it  is  stated  that  the  poor 
would  never  cease  out  of  the  land.  The  following  clause,  "  for 
Jehovah  will  bless  thee,'*  etc.,  gives  a  reason  for  the  main  thought, 
that  they  were  not  to  press  the  Israelitish  debtor.  The  creditor, 
therefore,  had  no  need  to  fear  that  he  would  suffer  want,  if  he 
refrained  from  exacting  his  debt  from  his  brother  in  the  seventh 
year. — Vers.  5,  6.  This  blessing  would  not  fail,  if  the  Israelites 
would  only  hearken  to  the  voice  of  the  Lord ;  "  for  Jehovah  blesseth 
thee"  (by  the  perfect  ^^^a^  the  blessing  is  represented  not  as  a 
possible  and  future  one  only,  but  as  one  already  bestowed  according 
to  the  counsel  of  God,  and,  so  far  as  the  commencement  was  con- 
cerned, already  fulfilled),  "  as  He  hath  spoken"  (see  at  chap.  i.  11). 
"  And  thou  loilt  lend  on  pledge  to  many  jiations,  hut  thou  thyself  wilt 
not  borrow  upon  pledge"  t33y,  a  denom.  verb,  from  ^^^y,  a  pledge, 
signifies  in  Kal  to  give  a  pledge  for  the  purpose  of  borrowing ;  in 
Iliphil,  to  cause  a  person  to  give  a  pledge,  or  furnish  occasion  for 
giving  a  pledge,  i.e,  to  lend  upon  pledge.  "  And  thou  wilt  rule  over 
many  nations"  etc.  Ruling  is  mentioned  here  as  the  result  of  supe- 
riority in  wealth  (cf.  chap,  xxviii.  1 :  Schultz). — Vers.  7-11.  And  in 
general  Israel  was  to  be  ready  to  lend  to  the  poor  among  its  brethren, 
not  to  harden  its  heart,  to  be  hard-hearted,  but  to  lend  to  the  poor 
brother  ilDHD  ^"i,  "  the  sufficiency  of  his  need,"  whatever  he  might 
need  to  relieve  his  wants. — Vers.  9,  10.  Thus  they  were  also  to 
beware  "  that  there  was  not  a  word  in  the  heart,  worthlessness"  i.e. 
that  a  worthless  thought  did  not  arise  in  their  hearts  (^V!rr^  is  the 
predicate  of  the  sentence,  as  the  more  precise  definition  of  the  word 
that  was  in  the  heart)  ;  so  that  one  should  say,  "  The  seventh  year  is 
at  hand,  the  year  of  release,"  sc.  when  I  shall  not  be  able  to  demand 
what  I  have  lent,  and  "  that  thine  eye  be  evil  towards  thy  poor  brother," 
i.e.  that  thou  cherishest  ill-will  towards  him  (cf.  chap,  xxviii.  54,  56), 
"  and  glvest  him  not,  and  he  appeals  to  Jehovah  against  thee,  and  it 
becomes  sin  to  thee,"  sc.  which  brings  down  upon  thee  the  wrath  of 
God. — Ver.  10.  Thou  shalt  give  him,  and  thy  heart  shall  not  be- 
come evil,  i.e.  discontented  thereat  (cf.  2  Cor.  ix.  7),  for  Jehovah 
will  bless  thee  for  it  (cf.  Prov.  xxii.  9,  xxviii.  27 ;  Ps.  xli.  2  ;  Matt, 
vi.  4). — Ver.  11.  For  the  poor  will  never  cease  in  the  land,  even  the 
land  that  is  richly  blessed,  because  poverty  is  not  only  the  penalty 
of  sin,  but  is  ordained  by  God  for  punishment  and  discipline. 

Vers.  12—18.  These  provisions  in  favour  of  the  poor  are  fol- 
lowed very  naturally  by  the  rules  which  the  Israelites  were  to  be 
urged  to  observe  with  reference  to  the  manumission  of  Hebrew 


372  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


1 


slaves.  It  is  not  the  reference  to  the  sabbatical  year  in  the  fore- 
going precepts  which  forms  the  introduction  to  the  laws  which  fol- 
low respecting  the  manumission  of  Hebrews  who  had  become  slaves, 
but  the  poverty  and  want  which  compelled  Hebrew  men  and  women 
to  sell  themselves  as  slaves.  The  seventh  year,  in  which  they  were 
to  be  set  free,  is  not  the  same  as  the  sabbatical  year,  therefore,  but 
the  seventh  year  of  bondage.  Manumission  in  the  seventh  year  of 
service  had  already  been  commanded  in  Ex.  xxi.  2-6,  in  the  rights 
laid  down  for  the  nation,  with  special  reference  to  the  conclusion  of 
the  covenant.  This  command  is  not  repeated  here  for  the  purpose 
of  extending  the  law  to  Hebrew  women,  who  are  not  expressly -Jl 
mentioned  in  Ex.  xxi. ;  for  that  would  follow  as  a  matter  of  course,  "■ 
in  the  case  of  a  law  which  w^as  quite  as  applicable  to  women  as  to 
men,  and  was  given  without  any  reserve  to  the  whole  congregation. 
It  is  rather  repeated  here  as  a  law  which  already  existed  as  a  right, 
for  the  purpose  of  explaining  the  true  mode  of  fulfilling  it,  viz.  that 
it  was  not  sufficient  to  give  a  man-servant  and  maid-servant  their 
liberty  after  six  years  of  service,  which  would  not  be  sufficient  relief 
to  those  who  had  been  obliged  to  enter  into  slavery  on  account  of 
poverty,  if  they  had  nothing  with  which  to  set  up  a  home  of  their 
own ;  but  love  to  the  poor  was  required  to  do  more  than  this, 
namely,  to  make  some  provision  for  the  continued  prosperity  of  those 
who  were  set  at  liberty.  "  If  tJiou  let  him  go  free  from  thee,  thou 
shalt  not  let  him  go  (send  him  away)  empty :"  this  was  the  new 
feature  which  Moses  added  here  to  the  previous  law.  "  Thou  shalt 
load  (y^^VJ^y  lit.  put  upon  the  neck)  of  thy  flock,  and  of  thy  floor 
(corn),  and  of  thy  press  (oil  and  wine) ;  wherewith  thy  God  hath  blessed 
thee,  of  that  thou  shalt  give  to  himP — Yer.  15.  They  w^ere  to  be  in- 
duced to  do  this  by  the  recollection  of  their  own  redemption  out  of 
the  bondage  of  Egypt, — the  same  motive  that  is  urged  for  the  laws  jH 
and  exhortations  enjoining  compassion  towards  foreigners,  servants,  ^ 
maids,  widows,  orphans,  and  the  poor,  not  only  in  chap.  v.  15,  x.  19, 
xvi.  12,  xxiv.  18,  22,  but  also  in  Ex.  xxii.  20,  xxiii.  9,  and  Lev.  xix. 
34. — Yers.  16,  17.  But  if  the  man-servant  and  the  maid-servant 
should  not  wish  for  liberty  in  the  sixth  year,  because  it  was  well 
with  them  in  the  house  of  their  master,  they  were  not  to  be  com- 
pelled to  go,  but  were  to  be  bound  to  eternal,  Le,  lifelong  bondage, 
in  the  manner  prescribed  in  Ex.  xxi.  5,  6.^     This  is  repeated  from 

^  KnobeVs  assertion,  that  the  judicial  process  enjoined  in  Ex.  xxi.  6  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  usual  in  the  author's  own  time,  is  a  worthless  argumentum  e 
silentio. 


CHAP.  XV.  19-23.  373 

Ex.  xxl.j  to  guard  against  such  an  application  of  the  law  as  might 
be  really  cruelty  under  the  circumstances  rather  than  love.  Manu- 
mission was  only  an  act  of  love,  when  the  person  to  be  set  free  had 
some  hope  of  success  and  of  getting  a  living  for  himself ;  and  where 
there  was  no  such  prospect,  compelling  him  to  accept  of  freedom 
might  be  equivalent  to  thrusting  him  away. — ^Ver.  18.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  servant  (or  maid)  wished  to  be  set  free,  the  master 
was  not  to  think  it  hard ;  "  for  the  double  of  the  wages  of  a  day- 
labourer  he  has  earned  for  thee  for  six  years^^  i.e.  not  "  twice  the 
time  of  a  day-labourer,  so  that  he  had  really  deserved  twice  the 
wages"  {Vatablius,  Ad.  Osiander,  J.  Gerhard),  for  it  cannot  be 
proved  from  Isa.  xvi.  14,  that  a  day-labourer  generally  hired  him- 
self out  for  three  years ;  nor  yet,  "  he  has  been  obliged  to  work 
much  harder  than  a  day-labourer,  very  often  by  night  as  well  as 
day"  (Clericus,  J,  H.  Michaelis,  JRosenmilUer,  Baumgarten)  ;  but 
simply,  "  he  has  earned  and  produced  so  much,  that  if  you  had 
been  obliged  to  keep  a  day-labourer  in  his  place,  it  would  have  cost 
you  twice  as  much"  (Schultz,  Knobel). 

Vers.  19-23.  Application  of  the  First-boen  of  Cattle. 
— From  the  laws  respecting  the  poor  and  slaves,  to  which  the  in- 
structions concerning  the  tithes  (chap.  xiv.  22-29)  had  given  occa- 
sion, Moses  returns  to  appropriation  of  the  first-born  of  the  herd 
and  flock  to  sacrificial  meals,  which  he  had  already  touched  upon  in 
chap.  xii.  6,  17,  and  xiv.  23,  and  concludes  by  an  explanation  upon 
this  point.  The  command,  which  the  Lord  had  given  when  first 
they  came  out  of  Egypt  (Ex.  xiii.  2,  12),  that  all  the  first-born  of 
the  herd  and  flock  should  be  sanctified  to  Him,  is  repeated  here  by 
Moses,  with  the  express  injunction  that  they  were  not  to  work  with 
the  first-born  of  cattle  (by  yoking  them  to  the  plough  or  waggon), 
and  not  to  shear  the  first-born  of  sheep ;  that  is  to  say,  they  were 
not  to  use  the  first-born  animals  which  were  sanctified  to  the  Lord 
for  their  own  earthly  purposes,  but  to  offer  them  year  by  year  as 
sacrifices  to  the  Lord,  and  consume  them  in  sacrificial  meals,  in  the 
manner  explained  at  p.  357.  To  this  he  adds  (vers.  21,  22)  the 
further  provision,  that  first-born  animals,  which  were  blind  or  lame, 
or  had  any  other  bad  fault,  were  not  to  be  offered  in  sacrifice  to  the 
Lord,  but,  like  ordinary  animals  used  for  food,  could  be  eaten  in 
all  the  towns  of  the  land.  Although  the  first  part  of  this  law  was 
involved  in  the  general  laws  as  to  the  kind  of  animal  that  could  be 
offered  in  sacrifice  (Lev.  xxii.  19  sqq.),  it  was  by  no  means  unim- 


374  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

portant  to  point  out  distinctly  their  applicability  to  the  first-born, 
and  add  some  instructions  with  regard  to  the  way  in  which  they 
were  to  be  applied.    (On  vers.  22  and  23,  see  chap.  xii.  15  and  16.) 

On  the  Celebration  of  the  Feasts  of  Passover ,  of  Pentecost^  and  of 
Tabernacles, — Chap.  xvi.  1-17. 

The  annual  feasts  appointed  by  the  law  were  to  be  celebrated, 
like  the  sacrificial  meals,  at  the  place  which  the  Lord  would  choose 
for  the  revelation  of  His  name;  and  there  Israel  was  to  rejoice 
before  the  Lord  with  the  presentation  of  sacrifices.  From  this 
point  of  view  Moses  discusses  the  feasts  of  Passover,  Pentecost, 
and  Tabernacles,  assuming  the  laws  previously  given  concerning 
these  festivals  (Ex.  xii.,  Lev.  xxiii.,  and  Num.  xxviii.  and  xxix.)  as 
already  known,  and  simply  repeating  those  points  which  related  to 
the  sacrificial  meals  held  at  these  festivals.  This  serves  to  explain 
the  reason  why  only  those  three  festivals  are  mentioned,  at  which 
Israel  had  already  been  commanded  to  appear  before  the  Lord 
in  Ex.  xxiii.  14-17,  and  xxxiv.  18,  24,  2b,  and  not  the  feast  of 
trumpets  or  day  of  atonement :  viz.  because  the  people  were  not 
required  to  assemble  at  the  sanctuary  out  of  the  whole  land  on  the 
occasion  of  these  two  festivals.^ 

Vers.  1-8.  Israel  was  to  make  ready  the  Passover  to  the  Lord 
in  the  earing  month  (see  at  Ex.  xii.  2).  The  precise  day  is  sup- 
posed to  be  known  from  Ex.  xii.,  as  in  Ex.  xxiii.  15.  HDQ  TX^V  (to 
prepare  the  Passover),  which  is  used  primarily  to  denote  the  pre- 
paration of  the  paschal  lamb  for  a  festal  meal,  is  employed  here  in 
a  wider  signification,  viz.  "  to  keep  the  Passover^  At  this  feast  they 
were  to  slay  sheep  and  oxen  to  the  Lord  for  a  Passover,  at  the 
place,  etc.  In  ver.  2,  as  in  ver.  1,  the  word  "Passover"  is  employed 
in  a  broader  sense,  and  includes  not  only  the  paschal  lamb,  but  the 
paschal  sacrifices  generally,  which  the  Rabbins  embrace  under  the 

^  That  the  assembling  of  the  people  at  the  central  sanctuary  is  the  leading 
point  of  view  under  which  the  feasts  are  regarded  here,  has  been  already 
pointed  out  by  Baclimann  {die  Feste,  p.  143),  who  has  called  attention  to  the 
fact  that  "the  place  which  Jehovah  thy  God  will  choose"  occurs  six  times  (vers. 
2,  6,  7,  11,  15,  16);  and  "before  the  face  of  Jehovah"  three  times  (vei-s.  11  and 
16  twice)  ;  and  that  the  celebration  of  the  feast  at  any  other  place  is  expressly 
declared  to  be  null  and  void.  At  the  same  time,  he  has  once  more  thoroughly 
exploded  the  contradictions  which  are  said  to  exist  between  this  chapter  and 
the  earlier  festal  laws,  and  which  Hup/eld  has  revived  in  his  comments  upon 
the  feasts,  without  troubling  himself  to  notice  the  careful  discussion  of  the 
subject  by  Hdvernick  in  his  Introduction,  and  Hengstenberg  in  his  Dissertations. 


CHAP.  XVI.  1-8.  375 

common  name  of  chagiga;  not  the  burnt-offerings  and  sin-off erings, 
however,  prescribed  in  Num.  xxviii.  19—26,  but  all  the  sacrifices 
that  were  slain  at  the  feast  of  the  Passover  {i.e.  during  the  seven 
days  of  the  Mazzotli^  which  are  included  under  the  name  of  pascJia) 
for  the  purpose  of  holding  sacrificial  meals.  This  is  evident  from 
the  expression  "o/  the  flock  and  the  herd;^^  as  it  was  expressly  laid 
down,  that  only  a  t^^,  i.e.  a  yearling  animal  of  the  sheep  or  goats, 
was  to  be  slain  for  the  paschal  meal  on  the  fourteenth  of  the  month 
in  the  evening,  and  an  ox  was  never  slaughtered  in  the  place  of  the 
lamb.  But  if  any  doubt  could  exist  upon  this  point,  it  would  be 
completely  set  aside  by  ver.  3 :  "  Thou  shalt  eat  no  leavened  bread 
with  it :  seven  days  shalt  thou  eat  unleavened  bread  therewith,"  As 
the  word  "  therewith  "  cannot  possibly  refer  to  anything  else  than 
the  ^^  Passover  "  in  ver.  2,  it  is  distinctly  stated  that  the  slaughter- 
ing and  eating  of  the  Passover  was  to  last  seven  days,  whereas  the 
Passover  lamb  was  to  be  slain  and  consumed  in  the  evening  of  the 
fourteenth  Abib  (Ex.  xii.  10).  Moses  called  the  unleavened  bread 
"  the  bread  of  affliction"  because  the  Israelites  had  to  leave  Egypt 
in  anxious  flight  (Ex.  xii.  11)  and  were  therefore  unable  to  leaven 
the  dough  (Ex.  xii.  39),  for  the  purpose  of  reminding  the  congrega- 
tion of  the  oppression  endured  in  Egypt,  and  to  stir  them  up  to 
gratitude  towards  the  Lord  their  deliverer,  that  they  might  re- 
member that  day  as  long  as  they  lived.  (On  the  meaning  of  the 
Mazzoth,  see  at  Ex.  xii.  8  and  15.) — On  account  of  the  importance 
of  the  unleavened  bread  as  a  symbolical  shadowing  forth  of  the 
significance  of  the  Passover,  as  the  feast  of  the  renewal  and  sancti- 
fication  of  the  life  of  Israel  (see  vol.  ii.  p.  21),  Moses  repeats  in 
ver.  4  two  of  the  points  in  the  law  of  the  feast :  first  of  all  the  one 
laid  down  in  Ex.  xiii.  7,  that  no  leaven  was  to  be  seen  in  the  land 
during  the  seven  days ;  and  secondly,  the  one  in  Ex.  xxiii.  18  and 
xxxiv.  25,  that  none  of  the  flesh  of  the  paschal  lamb  was  to  be  left 
till  the  next  morning,  in  order  that  all  corruption  might  be  kept  at 
a  distance  from  the  paschal  food.  Leaven,  for  example,  sets  the 
dough  in  fermentation,  from  which  putrefaction  ensues  (see  vol.  ii. 
p.  15);  and  in  the  East,  if  flesh  is  kept,  it  very  quickly  decom- 
poses. He  then  once  more  fixes  the  time  and  place  for  keeping  the 
Passover  (the  former  according  to  Ex.  xii.  6  and  Lev.  xxiii.  5, 
etc.),  and  adds  in  ver.  7  the  express  regulation,  that  not  only  the 
slaughtering  and  sacrificing,  but  the  roasting  (see  at  Ex.  xii.  9) 
and  eating  of  the  paschal  lamb  were  to  take  place  at  the  sanctuary, 
and  that  the  next  morning  they  could  turn  and  go  back  home. 


376  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

This  rule  contains  a  new  feature,  which  Moses  prescribes  with 
reference  to  the  keeping  of  the  Passover  in  the  land  of  Canaan, 
and  by  which  he  modifies  the  instructions  for  the  first  Passover  in 
Egypt,  to  suit  the  altered  circumstances.  In  Egypt,  when  Israel 
was  not  yet  raised  into  the  nation  of  Jehovah,  and  had  as  yet  no 
sanctuary  and  no  common  altar,  the  different  houses  necessarily 
served  as  altars.  But  when  this  necessity  was  at  an  end,  the  slay- 
ing and  eating  of  the  Passover  in  the  different  houses  were  to  cease, 
and  they  were  both  to  take  place  at  the  sanctuary  before  the  Lord, 
as  was  the  case  with  the  feast  of  Passover  at  Sinai  (Num.  ix.  1-5). 
Thus  the  smearing  of  the  door-posts  with  the  blood  was  tacitly 
abolished,  since  the  blood  was  to  be  sprinkled  upon  the  altar  as 
sacrificial  blood,  as  it  had  already  been  at  Sinai  (see  vol.  ii.  p.  50). 
— The  expression  " to  thy  tents"  for  going  " home,"  points  to  the 
time  when  Israel  was  still  dwelling  in  tents,  and  had  not  as  yet 
secured  any  fixed  abodes  and  houses  in  Canaan,  although  this  ex- 
pression was  retained  at  a  still  later  time  (e.g,  1  Sam.  xiii.  2  ;  2 
Sam.  xix.  9,  etc.).  The  going  home  in  the  morning  after  the 
paschal  meal,  is  not  to  be  understood  as  signifying  a  return  to  their 
homes  in  the  different  towns  of  the  land,  but  simply,  as  even  Riehm 
admits,  to  their  homes  or  lodgings  at  the  place  of  the  sanctuary. 
How  very  far  Moses  was  from  intending  to  release  the  Israelites 
from  the  duty  of  keeping  the  feast  for  seven  days,  is  evident  from 
the  fact  that  in  ver.  8  he  once  more  enforces  the  observance  of  the 
seven  days'  feast.  The  two  clauses,  "six  days  thou  shalt  eat 
mazzothj^  and  "  on  the  seventh  day  shall  be  azereth  (Eng.  Ver.  *  a 
solemn  assembly ')  to  the  Lord  thy  God,"  are  not  placed  in  anti- 
thesis to  each  other,  so  as  to  imply  (in  contradiction  to  vers.  3  and 
4 ;  Ex.  xii.  18,  19,  xiii.  6,  7 ,  Lev.  xxiii.  6 ;  Num.  xxviii.  17)  that 
the  feast  of  Mazzoth  was  to  last  only  six  days  instead  of  seven ;  but 
the  seventh  day  is  brought  into  especial  prominence  as  the  azereth 
of  the  feast  (see  at  Lev.  xxiii.  36),  simply  because,  in  addition  to 
the  eating  of  mazzoth,  there  was  to  be  an  entire  abstinence  from 
work,  and  this  particular  feature  might  easily  have  fallen  into 
neglect  at  the  close  of  the  feast.  But  just  as  the  eating  of  mazzoth 
for  seven  days  is  not  abolished  by  the  first  clause,  so  the  suspension 
of  work  on  the  first  day  is  not  abolished  by  the  second  clause,  any 
more  than  in  Ex.  xiii.  6  the  first  day  is  represented  as  a  working 
day  by  the  fact  that  the  seventh  day  is  called  "a  feast  to  Jehovah." 
Vers.  9-12.  With  regard  to  the  feast  OF  Weeks  (see  at  Ex. 
xxiii.  16),  it  is  stated  that  the  time  for  its  observance  was  to  be 


CHAP.  XVI.  13-17.  377 

reckoned  from  the  Passover.  Seven  weeks  shall  thej  count  ^'from 
the  beginning  of  the  sickle  to  the  com^^  i.e.  from  the  time  when  the 
sickle  began  to  be  applied  to  the  corn,  or  from  the  commencement 
of  the  corn-harvest.  As  the  corn-harvest  was  opened  with  the  pre- 
sentation of  the  sheaf  of  first-fruits  on  the  second  day  of  the  Pass- 
over, this  regulation  as  to  time  coincides  with  the  rule  laid  down  in 
Lev.  xxiii.  15.  "  Thou  shalt  keep  the  feast  to  the  Lord  thy  God 
according  to  the  measure  of  the  free  gift  of  thy  hand,  which  thou  givest 
as  Jehovah  thy  God  blesseth  theeJ'  The  dir.  Xey.  HDp  is  the  stand- 
ing rendering  in  the  Chaldee  for  "''^,  sufficiency,  need  ;  it  probably 
signifies  abundance,  from  ODD  =  riDD^  to  flow,  to  overflow,  to  derive. 
The  idea  is  this  :  Israel  was  to  keep  this  feast  with  sacrificial  gifts, 
which  every  one  was  able  to  bring,  according  to  the  extent  to  which 
the  Lord  had  blessed  him,  and  (ver.  11)  to  rejoice  before  the  Lord  at 
the  place  where  His  name  dwelt  with  sacrificial  meals,  to  which  the 
needy  were  to  be  invited  (cf.  xiv.  29),  in  remembrance  of  the  fact 
that  they  also  were  bondmen  in  Egypt  (cf.  xv.  15).  The  ^'free- 
will offering  of  the  hand"  which  the  Israelites  were  to  bring  with 
them  to  this  feast,  and  with  which  they  were  to  rejoice  before  the 
Lord,  belonged  to  the  free-will  gifts  of  burnt-offerings,  meat-offer- 
ings, drink-offerings,  and  thank-offerings,  which  might  be  offered, 
according  to  Num.  xxix.  39  (cf.  Lev.  xxiii.  38),  at  every  feast, 
along  with  the  festal  sacrifices  enjoined  upon  the  congregation. 
The  latter  were  binding  upon  the  priests  and  congregation,  and 
are  fully  described  in  Num.  xxviii.  and  xxix.,  so  that  there  was  no 
necessity  for  Moses  to  say  anything  further  with  reference  to  them. 
Vers.  13-17.  In  connection  with  the  feast  of  Tabernacles 
also,  he  simply  enforces  the  observance  of  it  at  the  central  sanctuary, 
and  exhorts  the  people  to  rejoice  at  this  festival,  and  not  only  to 
allow  their  sons  and  daughters  to  participate  in  this  joy,  but  also 
the  man-servant  and  maid-servant,  and  the  portionless  Levites, 
strangers,  widows,  and  orphans.  After  what  had  already  been 
stated,  Moses  did  not  consider  it  necessary  to  mention  expressly 
that  this  festal  rejoicing  was  also  to  be  manifested  in  joyous  sacrifi- 
cial meals ;  it  was  enough  for  him  to  point  to  the  blessing  which 
God  had  bestowed  upon  their  cultivation  of  the  corn,  the  olive,  and 
the  vine,  and  upon  all  the  works  of  their  hands,  i.e.  upon  their 
labour  generally  (vers.  13-15),  as  there  w^as  nothing  further  to 
remark  after  the  instructions  which  had  already  been  given  with 
reference  to  this  feast  also  (Lev.  xxiii.  34-36,  39-43 ;  Num.  xxix. 
12-38). — Vers.  16,  17.  In  conclusion,  the  law  is  repeated,  that  the 


378  THE  HFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

men  were  to  appear  before  the  Lord  three  times  a  year  at  the  tlirce 
feasts  just  mentioned  (compare  Ex.  xxiii.  17  with  ver.  15,  and  chap. 
xxxiv.  23),  with  the  additional  clause,  "  at  the  place  wJiich  the  Lord 
shall  choose^^  and  the  following  explanation  of  the  words  "not 
empty:"  ''every  man  according  to  the  gift  of  his  hand,  according  to 
the  blessing  of  Jehovah  his  God,  which  He  hath  given  thee^^  i.e.  with 
sacrificial  gifts,  as  much  as  every  one  could  offer,  according  to  the 
blessing  which  he  had  received  from  God. 

On  the  Administration  of  Justice  and  the  Choice  of  a  King, — 
Chap.  xvi.  18-xvii.  20. 

Just  as  in  its  religious  worship  the  Tsraelitish  nation  was  to  show 
itself  to  be  the  holy  nation  of  Jehovah,  so  was  it  in  its  political  relations 
also.  This  thought  forms  the  link  between  the  laws  already  given 
and  those  which  follow.  Civil  order — that  indispensable  condition 
of  the  stability  and  prosperity  of  nations  and  states — ^rests  upon  a 
conscientious  maintenance  of  right  by  means  of  a  well-ordered  judi- 
cial constitution  and  an  impartial  administration  of  justice. — For  the 
purpose  of  settling  the  disputes  of  the  people,  Moses  had  already 
provided  them  with  judges  at  Sinai,  and  had  given  the  judges  them- 
selves the  necessary  instinictions  for  the  fulfilment  of  their  duties 
(Ex.  xviii.).  This  arrangement  might  suffice  as  long  as  the  people 
were  united  in  one  camp  and  had  Moses  for  a  leader,  who  could  lay 
before  God  any  difficult  cases  that  were  brought  to  him,  and  give 
an  absolute  decision  with  divine  authority.  But  for  future  times, 
when  Israel  would  no  longer  possess  a  prophet  and  mediator  like 
Moses,  and  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan  would  live  scattered  about 
in  the  towns  and  villages  of  the  whole  land,  certain  modifications 
and  supplementary  additions  were  necessary  to  adapt  this  judicial 
constitution  to  the  altered  circumstances  of  the  people.  Moses  anti- 
cipates this  want  in  the  following  provisions,  in  which  he  fii^st  of  all 
commands  the  appointment  of  judges  and  officials  in  every  town, 
and  gives  certain  precise  injunctions  as  to  their  judicial  proceedings 
(chap.  xvi.  18-xvii.  7);  and  secondly,  appoints  a  higher  judicial 
court  at  the  place  of  the  sanctuary  for  the  more  difficult  cases 
(chap.  xvii.  8-13) ;  and  thirdly,  gives  them  a  law  for  the  future 
with  reference  to  the  choice  of  a  king  (vers.  14-20). 

Chap.  xvi.  18-xvii.  7.  Appointment  and  Instruction  of 
THE  Judges. — Ver.  18.  "Judges  and  officers  thou  shalt  appoint  thee 
in  all  thy  gates  (places,  see  at  Ex.  xx.  10),  which  Jehovah  thy  God 


CHAP.  XVI.  18- XVII.  7.  379 

shall  give  thee,  according  to  thy  trihesr  The  nation  is  addressed  as 
a  whole,  and  directed  to  appoint  for  itself  judges  and  officers,  i.e.  to 
choose  them,  and  have  them  appointed  by  its  rulers,  just  as  was 
done  at  Sinai,  where  the  people  chose  the  judges,  and  Moses  in- 
ducted into  office  the  persons  so  chosen  (cf.  chap.  i.  12—18).  That 
the  same  course  was  to  be  adopted  in  future,  is  evident  from  the 
expression,  "  throughout  thy  tribes,"  i.e.  according  to  thy  tribes, 
which  points  back  to  chap.  i.  13.  Election  by  majorities  was  un- 
known to  the  Mosaic  law.  The  shoterim,  officers  (lit.  writers,  see 
at  Ex.  V.  6),  who  were  associated  with  the  judges,  according  to 
chap.  i.  15,  even  under  the  previous  arrangement,  were  not  merely 
messengers  and  servants  of  the  courts,  but  secretaries  and  advisers 
of  the  judges,  who  derived  their  title  from  the  fact  that  they  had 
to  draw  up  and  keep  the  genealogical  lists,  and  who  are  mentioned 
as  already  existing  in  Egypt  as  overseers  of  the  people  and  of  their 
work  (see  at  Ex.  v.  6 ;  and  for  the  different  opinions  concerning 
their  official  position,  see  Selden,  de  St/nedriis,  i.  pp.  342-3).  The 
new  features,  which  Moses  introduces  here,  consist  simply  in  the 
fact  that  every  place  was  to  have  its  own  judges  and  officers, 
whereas  hitherto  they  had  only  been  appointed  for  the  larger  and 
smaller  divisions  of  the  nation,  according  to  their  genealogical  or- 
ganization. Moses  lays  down  no  rule  as  to  the  number  of  judges 
and  shoterim  to  be  appointed  in  each  place,  because  this  would 
depend  upon  the  number  of  the  inhabitants ;  and  the  existing  ar- 
rangement of  judges  over  tens,  hundreds,  etc.  (Ex.  xviii.  21), 
would  still  furnish  the  necessary  standard.  The  statements  made 
by  Josephus  and  the  Rabhins  with  regard  to  the  number  of  judges 
in  each  place  are  contradictory,  or  at  all  events  are  founded  upon 
the  circumstances  of  much  later  times  (see  my  Archdologie,  ii.  pp. 
257-8). — These  judges  were  to  judge  the  people  with  just  judg- 
ment. The  admonition  in  ver.  19  corresponds  to  the  instructions 
in  Ex.  xxiii.  6  and  8.  "  Respect  persons  :"  as  in  chap.  i.  17.  To 
this  there  is  added,  in  ver.  20,  an  emphatic  admonition  to  strive 
zealously  to  maintain  justice.  The  repetition  of  the  word  justice 
is  emphatic  :  justice,  and  nothing  but  justice,  as  in  Gen.  xiv.  10, 
etc.  But  in  order  to  give  the  people  and  the  judges  appointed  by 
them  a  brief  practical  admonition,  as  to  the  things  they  were  more 
especially  to  observe  in  their  administration  of  justice,  Moses  notices 
by  way  of  example  a  few  crimes  that  were  deserving  of  punishment 
(vers.  21,  22,  and  chap.  xvii.  1),  and  then  proceeds  in  chap.  xvii. 
2-7  to  describe  more  fully  the  judicial  proceedings  in  the  case  of 


380  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


idolaters.  —  Ver.  21.  "  Thou  shall  not  plant  thee  as  asherah  any 
wood  beside  the  altar  of  Jehovah^  V^J,  to  plant,  used  figuratively, 
to  plant  up  or  erect,  as  in  Eccles.  xii.  11,  Dan.  xi.  25  ;  cf.  Isa.  li.  16. 
Asherahy  the  symbol  of  Astarte  (see  at  Ex.  xxxiv.  13),  cannot  mean 
either  a  green  tree  or  a  grove  (as  Movers,  Relig.  der  Phonizier, 
p.  572,  supposes),  for  the  simple  reason  that  in  other  passages  we 
find  the  words  n^^y^  make  (1  Kings  xiv.  15,  xvi.  33 ;  2  Kings  xvii. 
16,  xxi.  3 ;  2  Chron.  xxxiii.  3),  or  ysT}^  set  up  (2  Kings  xvii.  10), 
^i^oyrij  stand  up  (2  Chron.  xxxiii.  19),  and  nj^ij  build  (1  Kings  xiv. 
23),  used  to  denote  the  erection  of  an  asherah,  not  one  of  which  is 
at  all  suitable  to  a  tree  or  grove.  But  what  is  quite  decisive  is  the 
fact  that  in  1  Kings  xiv.  23,  2  Kings  xvii.  10,  Jer.  xvii.  2,  the 
asherah  is  spoken  of  as  being  set  up  under,  or  by  the  side  of,  the 
green  tree.  This  idol  generally  consisted  of  a  wooden  column ;  and 
a  favourite  place  for  setting  it  up  was  by  the  side  of  the  altars  of 
Baal. — Ver.  22.  They  were  also  to  abstain  from  setting  up  any 
mazzebah,  i.e.  any  memorial  stone,  or  stone  pillar  dedicated  to  Baal 
(see  at  Ex.  xxiii.  24). 

Chap.  xvii.  1.  Not  only  did  the  inclination  to  nature-worship, 
such  as  the  setting  up  of  the  idols  of  Ashera  and  Baal,  belong  to 
the  crimes  which  merited  punishment,  but  also  a  manifest  trans- 
gression of  the  laws  concerning  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  such  as 
the  offering  of  an  ox  or  sheep  that  had  some  fault,  which  was  an 
abomination  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah  (see  at  Lev.  xxii.  20  sqq.). 
"  Any  evil  thing ^^  i,e,  any  of  the  faults  enumerated  in  Lev.  xxii. 
22-24. — Vers.  2-7.  If  such  a  case  should  occur,  as  that  a  man  or 
woman  transgressed  the  covenant  of  the  Lord  and  went  after  other 
gods  and  worshipped  them ;  when  it  was  made  known,  the  facts 
were  to  be  carefully  inquired  into ;  and  if  the  charge  were  substan- 
tiated, the  criminal  was  to  be  led  out  to  the  gate  and  stoned.  On 
the  testimony  of  two  or  three  witnesses,  not  of  one  only,  he  was  to 
be  put  to  death  (see  at  Num.  xxxv.  30) ;  and  the  hand  of  the  wit- 
nesses was  to  be  against  him  first  to  put  him  to  death,  i.e.  to  throw 
the  first  stones  at  him,  and  all  the  people  were  to  follow.  With 
regard  to  the  different  kinds  of  idolatry  in  ver.  3,  see  chap.  iv.  19. 
(On  ver.  4,  see  chap.  xiii.  15.)  "  Bring  him  out  to  thy  gates^^  i.e. 
to  one  of  the  gates  of  the  town  in  which  the  crime  was  committed. 
By  the  gates  we  are  to  understand  the  open  space  near  the  gates, 
where  the  judicial  proceedings  took  place  (cf.  Neh.  viii.  1,  3 ;  Job 
xxix.  7),  the  sentence  itself  being  executed  outside  the  town  (cf. 
chap.  xxii.  24 ;  Acts  vii.  58 ;  Heb.  xiii.  12),  just  as  it  had  been  out- 


1 


CHAP.  XVII.  8-13.  381 

side  the  camp  during  the  journey  through  the  wilderness  (Lev. 
xxiv.  14 ;  Num.  xv.  36),  to  indicate  the  exclusion  of  the  criminal 
from  the  congregation,  and  from  fellowship  with  God.  The  in- 
fliction of  punishment  in  vers.  5  sqq.  is  like  that  prescribed  in  chap, 
xiii.  10,  11,  for  those  who  tempted  others  to  idolatry ;  with  this 
exception,  that  the  testimony  of  more  than  one  witness  was  required 
before  the  sentence  could  be  executed,  and  the  witnesses  were  to 
be  the  first  to  lift  up  their  hands  against  the  criminal  to  stone  him, 
that  they  might  thereby  give  a  practical  proof  of  the  truth  of  their 
statement,  and  their  own  firm  conviction  that  the  condemned  was 
deserving  of  death, — "  a  rule  which  would  naturally  lead  to  the  sup- 
position that  no  man  would  come  forward  as  a  witness  without  the 
fullest  certainty  or  the  greatest  depravity"  (Schnell,  das  isr,  Recht)} 
nsn  (ver.  6),  the  man  exposed  to  death,  who  was  therefore  really 
ipso  facto  already  dead.  "  So  shalt  thou  put  the  evil  awai/j^  etc.  : 
of.  chap.  xiii.  6. 

Vers.  8-13.  The  higher  Judicial  Court  at  the  Place 
OF  THE  Sanctuary. — Just  as  the  judges  appointed  at  Sinai  were 
to  bring  to  Moses  whatever  cases  were  too  difficult  for  them  to 
decide,  that  he  might  judge  them  according  to  the  decision  of  God 
(Ex.  xviii.  26  and  19)  ;  so  in  the  future  the  judges  of  the  different 
towns  were  to  bring  all  difficult  cases,  which  they  were  unable  to 
decide,  before  the  Levitical  priests  and  judges  at  the  place  of  the 
sanctuary,  that  a  final  decision  might  be  given  there. — Vers.  8  sqq. 
"  If  there  is  to  thee  a  matter  too  marvellous  for  judgment  (^^??  with 
HO  J  too  wonderful,  incomprehensible,  or  beyond  carrying  out,  Gen. 
xviii.  14,  i.e.  too  difficult  to  give  a  judicial  decision  upon),  between 
blood  and  blood,  plea  and  plea,  stroke  and  stroke  (i.e.  too  hard  for 
you  to  decide  according  to  what  legal  provisions  a  fatal  blow,  or  dis- 
pute on  some  civil  matter,  or  a  bodily  injury,  is  to  be  settled),  dis- 
putes in  thy  gates  (a  loosely  arranged  apposition  in  this  sense,  disputes 
of  different  kinds,  such  as  shall  arise  in  thy  towns)  ;  arise,  and  get 
thee  to  the  place  which  Jehovah  thy  God  shall  choose ;  and  go  to  the 
Levitical  priests  and  the  judge  that  shall  be  in  those  days,  and  in- 

^  "He  assigned  this  part  to  the  witnesses,  chiefly  because  there  are  so  many 
whose  tongue  is  so  slippery,  not  to  say  good  for  nothing,  that  they  would  boldly 
strangle  a  man  with  their  words,  when  they  would  not  dare  to  touch  him  with 
one  of  their  fingers.  It  was  the  best  remedy,  therefore,  that  could  be  tried  for 
restraining  such  levity,  to  refuse  to  admit  the  testimony  of  any  man  who  was 
not  ready  to  execute  judgment  with  his  own  hand"  (Calvin). 


382  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

quirer  Israel  is  addressed  here  as  a  nation,  but  the  words  are  not 
to  be  supposed  to  be  directed  "  first  of  all  to  the  local  courts 
(chap.  xvi.  18),  and  lastly  to  the  contending  parties"  (Kriobel),  nor 
"  directly  to  the  parties  to  the  suit"  (Schultz),  but  simply  to  the  per- 
sons whose  duty  it  was  to  administer  justice  in  the  nation,  i.e.  to 
tlie  regular  judges  in  the  different  towns  and  districts  of  the  land. 
This  is  evident  from  the  general  fact,  that  the  Mosaic  law  never 
recognises  any  appeal  to  higher  courts  by  the  different  parties  to  a 
lawsuit,  and  that  in  this  case  also  it  is  not  assumed,  since  all  that  is 
enjoined  is,  that  if  the  matter  should  be  too  difficult  for  the  local 
judges  to  decide,  they  themselves  were  to  carry  it  to  the  superior 
court.  As  Oehler  has  quite  correctly  observed  in  Herzog's  Cyclo- 
paedia, "  this  superior  court  was  not  a  court  of  appeal ;  for  it  did 
not  adjudicate  after  the  local  court  had  already  given  a  verdict,  but 
in  cases  in  which  the  latter  would  not  trust  itself  to  give  a  verdict 
at  all."  And  this  is  more  especially  evident  from  what  is  stated  in 
ver.  10,  with  regard  to  the  decisions  of  the  superior  court,  namely, 
that  they  were  to  do  whatever  the  superior  judges  taught,  without 
deviating  to  the  right  hand  or  to  the  left.  This  is  unquestionably 
far  more  applicable  to  the  judges  of  the  different  towns,  who  were 
to  carry  out  exactly  the  sentence  of  the  higher  tribunal,  than  to  the 
parties  to  the  suit,  inasmuch  as  the  latter,  at  all  events  those  who 
were  condemned  for  blood  {Le.  for  murder),  could  not  possibly  be 
in  a  position  to  alter  the  decision  of  the  court  at  pleasure,  since  it 
did  not  rest  with  them,  but  with  the  authorities  of  their  town,  to 
carry  out  the  sentence. 

Moses  did  not  directly  institute  a  superior  tribunal  at  the  place 
of  the  sanctuary  on  this  occasion,  but  rather  assumed  its  existence ; 
not  however  its  existence  at  that  time  (as  Riehm  and  other  modern 
critics  suppose),  but  its  establishment  and  existence  in  the  future. 
Just  as  he  gives  no  minute  directions  concerning  the  organization 
of  the  different  local  courts,  but  leaves  this  to  the  natural  develop- 
ment of  the  judicial  institutions  already  in  existence,  so  he  also 
restricts  himself,  so  far  as  the  higher  court  is  concerned,  to  general 
allusions,  which  might  serve  as  a  guide  to  the  national  rulers  of  a 
future  day,  to  organize  it  according  to  the  existing  models.  He  had 
no  disorganized  mob  before  him,  but  a  well-ordered  nation,  already . 
in  possession  of  civil  institutions,  with  fruitful  germs  for  further 
expansion  and  organization.  In  addition  to  its  civil  classification 
into  tribes,  families,  fathers'  houses,  and  family  groups,  which  pos- 
sessed at  once  their  rulers  in  their  own  heads,  the  nation  had 


CHAP.  XVII.  8-13.  383 

received  in  the  priesthood,  with  the  high  priest  at  the  head,  and 
the  Levites  as  their  assistants,  a  spiritual  class,  which  mediated 
between  the  congregation  and  the  Lord,  and  not  only  kept  up  the 
knowledge  of  right  in  the  people  as  the  guardian  of  the  law,  but 
by  virtue  of  the  high  priest's  office  was  able  to  lay  the  rights  of 
the  people  before  God,  and  in  difficult  cases  could  ask  for  His 
decision.  Moreover,  a  leader  had  already  been  appointed  for  the 
nation,  for  the  time  immediately  succeeding  Moses'  death  ;  and  in 
this  nomination  of  Joshua,  a  pledge  had  been  given  that  the  Lord 
would  never  leave  it  without  a  supreme  ruler  of  its  civil  affairs, 
but,  along  with  the  high  priest,  would  also  appoint  a  judge  at  the 
place  of  the  central  sanctuary,  who  would  administer  justice  in  the 
highest  court  in  association  with  the  priests.  On  the  ground  of 
these  facts,  it  was  enough  for  the  future  to  mention  the  Levitical 
priests  and  the  judge  who  would  be  at  the  place  of  the  sanctuary, 
as  constituting  the  court  by  which  the  difficult  questions  were  to 
be  decided.^  For  instance,  the  words  themselves  show  distinctly 
enough,  that  by  "  the  judge "  we  are  not  to  understand  the  high 
priest,  but  the  temporal  judge  or  president  of  the  superior  court ; 
and  it  is  evident  from  the  singular,  "  the  priest  that  standeth  to 
jninister  there  before  the  Lord  "  (ver.  12),  that  the  high  priest  is  in- 
cluded among  the  priests.  The  expression  "  the  priests  the  Levites  " 
(Levitical  priests),  which  also  occurs  in  ver.  18,  chap,  xviii.  1,  xxi. 
5,  xxiv.  8,  xxvii.  9,  xxxi.  9,  instead  of  "  sons  of  Aaron,"  which 
we  find  in  the  middle  books,  is  quite  in  harmony  with  the  time  and 
character  of  the  book  before  us.  As  long  as  Aaron  was  living 
with  his  sons,  the  priesthood  consisted  only  of  himself  and  his  sons, 
that  is  to  say,  of  one  family.  Hence  all  the  instructions  in  the 
middle  books  are  addressed  to  them,  and  for  the  most  part  to 
Aaron  personally  (yid.  Ex.  xxviii.  and  xxix. ;  Lev.  viii.-x. ;  Num. 
xviii.,  etc.).  This  was  all  changed  when  Aaron  died ;  henceforth 
the  priesthood  consisted  simply  of  the  descendants  of  Aaron  and  his 
sons,  who  were  no  longer  one  family,  but  formed  a  distinct  class  in 
the  nation,  the  legitimacy  of  which  arose  from  its  connection  with 
the  tribe  of  Levi,  to  which  Aaron  himself  had  belonged.  It  was 
evidently  more  appropriate,  therefore,  to  describe  them  as  sons  of 

^  The  simple  fact,  that  the  judicial  court  at  the  place  of  the  national  sanc- 
tuary is  described  in  such  general  terms,  furnishes  a  convincing  proof  that  we 
have  here  the  words  of  Moses,  and  not  those  of  some  later  prophetic  writer  who 
had  copied  the  superior  court  at  Jerusalem  of  the  times  of  the  kings,  as  Riehm 
and  the  critics  assume. 


384  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


Levi  than  as  sons  of  Aaron,  which  had  been  the  title  formerlv 
given  to  the  priests,  with  the  exception  of  the  high  priest,  viz. 
Aaron  himself. — In  connection  with  the  superior  court,  however, 
the  priests  are  introduced  rather  as  knowing  and  teaching  theJl 
law  (Lev.  x.  11),  than  as  actual  judges.  For  this  reason  appeal^" 
was  to  be  made  not  only  to  them,  but  also  to  the  judge,  whose  duty 
it  was  in  any  case  to  make  the  judicial  inquiry  and  pronounce  the 
sentence. — The  object  of  the  verb  "  inqidi^e"  (ver.  9)  follows  after 
"  they  shall  show  thee,"  viz.  "  the  word  of  right,^  the  judicial  sen- 
tence which  is  sought  (2  Chron.  xix.  6). — Vers.  10,  11.  They  shall 
do  "  according  to  the  sound  of  the  word  which  they  utter^^  (follow 
their  decision  exactly),  and  that  "  according  to  the  sound  of  the  law 
which  they  teach,^*  and  "  according  to  the  right  which  they  shall 
speak.*'  The  sentence  was  to  be  founded  upon  the  Thorah,  upon 
the  law  which  the  priests  had  to  teach. — Ver.  12.  No  one  was  to 
resist  in  pride,  to  refuse  to  listen  to  the  priest  or  to  the  judge. 
Resistance  to  the  priest  took  place  when  any  one  was  dissatisfied 
with  his  interpretation  of  the  law ;  to  the  judge,  when  any  one  was 
discontented  with  the  sentence  that  was  passed  on  the  basis  of  the 
law.  Such  refractory  conduct  was  to  be  punished  with  death,  as 
rebellion  against  God,  in  whose  name  the  right  had  been  spoken 
(chap.  i.  17).     (On  ver.  13,  see  chap.  xiii.  12.) 


Vers.  14-20.  Choice  and  Right  of  the  King. — Vers.  14, 
15.  If  Israel,  when  dwelling  in  the  land  which  was  given  it  by  the 
Lord  for  a  possession,  should  wish  to  appoint  a  king,  like  all  the 
nations  round  about,  it  was  to  appoint  the  man  whom  Jehovah  its 
God  should  choose,  and  that  from  among  its  brethren,  i.e.  from  its 
own  people,  not  a  foreigner  or  non-Israelite.  The  earthly  king- 
dom in  Israel  was  not  opposed  to  the  theocracy,  i'.e.  to  the  rule  of 
Jehovah  as  king  over  the  people  of  His  possession,  provided  no 
one  was  made  king  but  the  person  whom  Jehovah  should  choose. 
The  appointment  of  a  king  is  not  commanded,  like  the  institution 
of  judges  (chap.  xvi.  18),  because  Israel  could  exist  under  the 
government  of  Jehovah,  even  without  an  earthly  king ;  it  is  simply 
permitted,  in  case  the  need  should  arise  for  a  regal  government. 
There  was  no  necessity  to  describe  more  minutely  the  course  to  be 
adopted,  as  the  people  possessed  the  natural  provision  for  the  ad- 
ministration of  their  national  affairs  in  their  well-organized  tribes, 
by  whom  this  point  could  be  decided.  Moses  also  omits  to  state  more 
particularly  in  what  way  Jehovah  would  make  known  the  choice  of 


I 


CHAF.  XVII.  14-20.  385 

the  king  to  be  appointed.  The  congregation,  no  doubt,  possessed 
one  means  of  askinij  the  will  of  the  Lord  in  the  Urim  and  Thummim 
of  the  high  priest,  provided  the  Lord  did  not  reveal  Plis  will  in  a 
different  manner,  namely  through  a  prophet,  as  He  did  in  the 
election  of  Saul  and  David  (1  Sam.  viii.,  ix.,  and  xvi.).  The  com- 
mand not  to  choose  a  foreigner,  acknowledged  the  right  of  the  nation 
to  choose.  Consequently  the  choice  on  the  part  of  the  Lord  may 
have  consisted  simply  in  His  pointing  out  to  the  people,  in  a  very 
evident  manner,  the  person  they  were  to  elect,  or  in  His  confirming 
the  choice  by  word  and  act,  as  in  accordance  with  His  will. — Three 
rules  are  laid  down  for  the  king  himself  in  vers.  16-20.  In  the 
first  place,  he  was  not  to  keep  many  horses,  or  lead  back  the  people 
to  Egypt,  to  multiply  horses,  because  Jehovah  had  forbidden  the 
people  to  return  thither  by  that  way.  The  notion  of  modern  critics, 
that  there  is  an  allusion  in  this  prohibition  to  the  constitution  of  the 
kingdom  under  Solomon,  is  so  far  from  having  any  foundation,  that 
the  reason  assigned — namely,  the  fear  lest  the  king  should  lead  back 
the  people  to  Egypt  from  his  love  of  horses,  "  to  the  end  that  he 
should  multiply  horses" — really  precludes  the  time  of  Solomon,  inas- 
much as  the  time  had  then  long  gone  by  when  any  thought  could 
have  been  entertained  of  leading  back  the  people  to  Egypt.  But 
such  a  reason  would  be  quite  in  its  place  in  Moses'  time,  and  only 
then,  "  when  it  would  not  seem  impossible  to  reunite  the  broken 
band,  and  when  the  people  were  ready  to  express  their  longing,  and 
even  their  intention,  to  return  to  Egypt  on  the  very  slightest  occa- 
sion ;  whereas  the  reason  assigned  for  the  prohibition  might  have 
furnished  Solomon  with  an  excuse  for  regarding  the  prohibition 
itself  as  merely  a  temporary  one,  which  was  no  longer  binding" 
(OeJder  in  Herzog's  Cyclopcedia:  vid.  Hengstenberg's  Dissertations).-^ 
The  second  admonition  also,  that  the  king  was  not  to  take  to  him- 
self many  wives,  and  turn  away  his  heart  (sc.  from  the  Lord),  nor 

1  When  Riehm  objects  to  this,  that  if  such  a  prohibition  had  been  unneces- 
sary in  a  future  age,  in  which  the  people  had  reached  the  full  consciousness  of 
its  national  independence,  and  every  thought  of  the  possibility  of  a  reunion 
with  the  Egyptians  had  disappeared,  Moses  would  never  have  issued  it,  since  he 
must  have  foreseen  the  national  independence  of  the  people  ;  the  force  of  this 
objection  rests  simply  upon  his  confoundiDg  foreseeing  with  assuming,  and  upon 
a  thoroughly  mistaken  view  of  the  prophet's  vision  of  the  future.  Even  if  Moses, 
as  "  a  great  prophet,"  did  foresee  the  future  national  independence  of  Israel,  he 
had  also  had  such  experience  of  the  fickle  character  of  the  people,  that  he  could 
not  regard  the  thought  of  returning  to  Egypt  as  absolutely  an  impossible  one, 
even  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan,  or  reject  it  as  inconceivable.    Moreover,  the 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  2  B 


386  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

greatly  multiply  to  himself  silver  and  gold,  can  be  explained  without 
the  hypothesis  that  there  is  an  allusion  to  Solomon's  reign,  although 
this  king  did  transgress  both  commands  (1  Eangs  x.  14  sqq.,  xi.  1 
sqq.).  A  richly  furnished  harem,  and  the  accumulation  of  silver 
and  gold,  were  inseparably  connected  with  the  luxury  of  Oriental 
monarchs  generally ;  so  that  the  fear  was  a  very  natural  one,  that 
the  future  king  of  Israel  might  follow  the  general  customs  of  the 
heathen  in  these  respects. — ^Yers.  18  sqq.  And  tJiirdli/,  Instead  of 
hanging  his  heart  upon  these  earthly  things,  when  he  sat  upon  his 
royal  throne  he  was  to  have  a  copy  of  the  law  written  out  by  the 
Levitical  priests,  that  he  might  keep  the  law  by  him,  and  read 
therein  all  the  days  of  his  life.  ^3  does  not  involve  writing  with 
his  own  hand  {Philo\  but  simply  having  it  written.  DN^n  nninn  np^ 
does  not  mean  to  Sevrepovoficov  tovto  (LXX.),  "  this  repetition  of 
the  law,"  as  Dfc^^n  cannot  stand  for  n^in  ;  but  a  copy  of  this  law,  as 
most  of  the  Rabbins  correctly  explain  it  in  accordance  with  the 
Chaldee  version,  though  they  make  mishneli  to  signify  duplum,  two 
copies  (see  Ildvernick,  Introduction). — Every  copy  of  a  book  is  really 
a  repetition  of  it.  "  F7'om  before  the  priests,^^  Le»  of  the  law  which 
lies  before  the  priests  or  is  kept  by  them.  The  object  of  the  daily 
reading  in  the  law  (vers.  195  and  20)  was  "  to  learn  the  fear  of 
the  Lordj  and  to  keep  His  commandments^  (cf.  v.  25,  vi.  2,  xiv.  23), 

prophetic  foresight  of  Moses  was  not,  as  Riehm  imagines  it,  a  foreknowledge  of 
all  the  separate  points  in  the  historical  development  of  the  nation,  much  less  a 
foreknowledge  of  the  thoughts  and  desires  of  the  heart,  which  might  arise  in  the 
course  of  time  amidst  the  changes  that  would  take  place  in  the  nation.  A  fore- 
sight of  the  development  of  Israel  into  national  independence,  so  far  as  we  may 
attribute  it  to  Moses  as  a  prophet,  was  founded  not  upon  the  character  of  the 
people,  but  upon  the  divine  choice  and  destination  of  Israel,  which  by  no  means 
precluded  the  possibility  of  their  desiring  to  return  to  Egypt,  even  at  some  future 
time,  since  God  Himself  had  threatened  the  people  with  dispersion  among  the 
heathen  as  the  punishment  for  continued  transgression  of  His  covenant,  and  yet, 
notwithstanding  this  dispersion,  had  predicted  the  ultimate  reahzation  of  His 
covenant  of  grace.  And  when  RieJim  still  further  observes,  that  the  taste  for 
horses,  which  lay  at  the  foundation  of  this  fear,  evidently  points  to  a  later  time, 
when  the  old  repugnance  to  cavalry  which  existed  in  the  nation  in  the  days  of 
the  judges,  and  even  under  David,  had  disappeared ;  this  supposed  repugnance 
to  cavalry  is  a  fiction  of  the  critic  himself,  without  any  historical  foundation. 
For  nothing  more  is  related  in  the  history,  than  that  before  the  time  of  Solo- 
mon the  IsraeUtes  had  not  cultivated  the  rearing  of  horses,  and  that  David  only 
kept  100  of  the  war-horses  taken  from  the  Syrians  for  himself,  and  had  the 
others  put  to  death  (2  Sam.  viii.  4).  And  so  long  as  horses  were  neither  reared 
nor  possessed  by  the  Israehtes,  there  can  be  no  ground  for  speaking  of  the  old 
repugnance  to  cavalry.     On  the  other  hand,  the  impossibility  of  tracing  this 


i 


CHAP.  XVIIL  1-8.  387 

that  his  heart  might  not  be  lifted  up  above  his  brethren,  that  he 
might  not  become  proud  (chap.  viii.  14),  and  might  not  turn  aside 
from  the  commandments  to  the  right  hand  or  to  the  left,  that  he 
and  his  descendants  might  live  long  upon  the  throne. 

Rights  of  the  Pnests,  the  Levites,  and  the  Prophets, — Chap,  xviii. 

In  addition  to  the  judicial  order  and  the  future  king,  it  was 
necessary  that  the  position  of  the  priests  and  Levites,  whose  duties 
and  rights  had  been  regulated  by  previous  laws,  should  at  least  be 
mentioned  briefly  and  finally  established  (vers.  1-8),  and  also  that 
the  prophetic  order  should  be  fully  accredited  by  the  side  of  the 
other  state  authorities,  and  its  operations  regulated  by  a  definite  law 
(vers.  9-22). 

Vers.  1-8.  The  Eights  of  the  Priests  and  Levites. — 
With  reference  to  these,  Moses  repeats  verbatim  from  Num.  xviii. 
20,  23,  24,  the  essential  part  of  the  rule  laid  down  in  Num.  xviii. : 
"  The  priests  the  Levites,  the  whole  tribe  of  Levi,  shall  have  no  part 
nor  inheritance  with  Israeli  "  All  the  tribe  of  Levi "  includes  the 
priests  and  Levites.  They  were  to  eat  the  "  firings  of  Jehovah  and 
His  inheritance,"  as  described  in  detail  in  Num.  xviii.  The  inherit- 
ance of  Jehovah  consisted  of  the  holy  gifts  as  well  as  the  sacrifices, 

prohibition  to  the  historical  circumstances  of  the  time  of  Solomon,  or  even  a 
later  age,  is  manifest  in  the  desperate  subterfuge  to  which  Riehm  has  recourse, 
when  he  connects  this  passage  with  the  threat  in  chap,  xxviii.  68,  that  if  all  the 
punishments  suspended  over  them  should  be  ineffectual,  (jod  would  carry  them 
back  in  ships  to  Egypt,  and  that  they  should  there  be  sold  to  their  enemies  as 
men-servants  and  maid-servants,  and  then  discovers  a  proof  in  this,  that  the 
Egyptian  king  Psammetichus,  who  sought  out  foreign  soldiers  and  employed 
them,  had  left  king  Manasseh  some  horses,  solely  on  the  condition  that  he  sent 
him  some  Israelitish  infantry,  and  placed  them  at  his  disposal.  But  this  is  not 
expounding  Scripture  ;  it  is  putting  hypotheses  into  it.  As  Oehler  has  already 
observed,  this  hypothesis  has  no  foundation  whatever  in  the  Old  Testament,  nor 
(we  may  add)  in  the  accounts  of  Herodotus  and  Diodorus  Siculus  concerning 
Psammetichus.  According  to  Diod.  (i.  QQ)^  Psammetichus  hired  soldiers  from 
Arabia,  Caria,  and  Ionia ;  and  according  to  Herodotus  (i.  152),  he  hired  lonians 
and  Carians  armed  with  brass,  that  he  might  conquer  his  rival  kings  with  their 
assistance.  But  neither  of  these  historians  says  anything  at  all  about  Israelitish 
infantry.  And  even  if  it  were  conceivable  that  any  king  of  Israel  or  Judah 
could  carry  on  such  trafl&c  in  men,  as  to  sell  his  own  subjects  to  the  Egyptians 
for  horses,  it  is  very  certain  that  the  prophets,  who  condemned  every  alliance 
with  foreign  kings,  and  were  not  silent  with  regard  to  Manasseh's  idolatry 
would  not  have  passed  over  such  an  abomination  as  this  without  remark  or 
without  reproof. 


388  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

i.e.  the  tithes,  firstlings,  and  first-fruits.  Moses  felt  it  to  be  super- 
fluous to  enumerate  these  gifts  one  by  one  from  the  previous  laws,  and 
also  to  describe  the  mode  of  their  application,  or  define  how  much 
belonged  to  the  priests  and  how  much  to  the  Levites.  However 
true  it  may  be  that  the  author  assigns  all  these  gifts  to  the  Levites 
generally,  the  conclusion  drawn  from  this,  viz.  that  he  was  not 
acquainted  with  any  distinction  between  priests  and  Levites,  but 
placed  the  Levites  entirely  on  a  par  with  the  priests,  is  quite  a  false 
one.  For,  apart  from  the  evident  distinction  between  the  priests  and 
Levites  in  ver.  1,  w^here  there  would  be  no  meaning  in  the  clause, 
"  all  the  tribe  of  Levi,"  if  the  Levites  were  identical  with  the 
priests,  the  distinction  is  recognised  and  asserted  as  clearly  as  pos- 
sible in  what  follows,  when  a  portion  of  the  slain-offerings  is  allotted 
to  the  priests  in  vers.  3-5,  whilst  in  vers.  6-8  the  Levite  is  allowed 
to  join  in  eating  the  altar  gifts,  if  he  come  to  the  place  of  the  sanc- 
tuary and  perform  service  there.  The  repetition  in  ver.  2  is  an 
emphatic  confirmation  :  ''As  He  hath  said  unto  them:^^  as  in  chap. 
X.  9. — Vers.  3-5.  "  This  shall  be  the  right  of  the  priests  on  the  part 
of  the  people^  on  the  'part  of  those  who  slaughter  slain-offerings,  whether 
ox  or  sheep ;  he  (the  offerer)  shall  give  the  priest  the  shoulder,  the 
cheek,  and  the  stomach^  V^TH,  the  shoulder,  i.e.  the  front  leg ;  see 
Num.  vi.  19.  •^?P''?,  the  rough  stomach,  to  TjvLarpov  (LXX.),  i.e. 
the  fourth  stomach  of  ruminant  animals,  in  which  the  digestion  of 
the  food  is  completed ;  Lat.  omasiis  or  ahomasus,  though  the  Vul- 
gate has  ventriculus  here.  On  the  choice  of  these  three  pieces  in 
particular,  Munster  and  Fagius  observe  that  "  the  sheep  possesses 
three  principal  parts,  the  head,  the  feet,  and  the  trunk ;  and  of  each 
of  these  some  portion  was  to  be  given  to  the  priest  who  officiated"  (?). 
"  Of  each  of  these  three  principal  parts  of  the  animal,"  says  Schultz, 
"  some  valuable  piece  was  to  be  presented :  the  shoulder  at  least, 
and  the  stomach,  which  was  regarded  as  particularly  fat,  are  seen  at 
once  to  have  been  especially  good."  That  this  arrangement  is  not  at 
variance  with  the  command  in  Lev.  vii.  32  sqq.,  to  give  the  wave- 
breast  and  heave-leg  of  the  peace-offerings  to  the  Lord  for  the 
priests,  but  simply  enjoins  a  further  gift  to  the  priests  on  the  part 
of  the  people,  in  addition  to  those  portions  which  were  to  be  given 
to  the  Lord  for  His  servants,  is  sufficiently  evident  from  the  con- 
text, since  the  heave-leg  and  wave-breast  belonged  to  the  firings  of 
Jehovah  mentioned  in  ver.  1,  which  the  priests  had  received  as  an 
inheritance  from  the  Lord,  that  is  to  say,  to  the  tenuphoth  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  which  the  priests  might  eat  with  their  sons  and 


CHAP.  XVIII.  1   8.  389 

daughters,  though  only  with  such  members  of  their  house  as  were 
levitically  clean  (Num.  xviii.  11);  and  also  from  the  words  of  the 
present  command,  viz.  that  the  portions  mentioned  were  to  be  a 
right  of  the  priests  on  the  part  of  the  people,  on  the  part  of  those 
who  slaughtered  slain-offerings,  i.e.  to  be  paid  to  the  priest  as  a 
right  that  was  due  to  him  on  the  part  of  the  people.  DBm  was 
what  the  priest  could  justly  claim.  This  right  w^as  probably  ac- 
corded to  the  priests  as  a  compensation  for  the  falling  off  which 
would  take  place  in  their  incomes  in  consequence  of  the  repeal  of 
the  law  that  every  animal  was  to  be  slaughtered  at  the  sanctuary  as 
a  sacrifice  (Lev.  xvii. ;  vid.  chap.  xii.  15  sqq.). 

The  only  thing  that  admits  of  dispute  is,  whether  this  gift  was 
to  be  presented  from  every  animal  that  was  slaughtered  at  home  for 
private  use,  or  only  from  those  which  were  slaughtered  for  sacri- 
ficial meals,  and  therefore  at  the  place  of  the  sanctuary.  Against 
the  former  view,  for  which  appeal  is  made  to  Philo,  Josephus  (Ant. 
iv.  4,  4),  and  the  Talmud,  we  may  adduce  not  only  "  the  difficulty 
of  carrying  out  such  a  plan  "  (was  every  Israelite  who  slaughtered 
an  ox,  a  sheep,  or  a  goat  to  carry  the  pieces  mentioned  to  the  priests' 
town,  which  might  be  many  miles  away,  or  were  the  priests  to 
appoint  persons  to  collect  them  ?),  but  the  general  use  of  the  words 
nnT  n^T.  The  noun  nnt  always  signifies  either  slaughtering  for  a 
sacrificial  meal  or  a  slain  sacrifice,  and  the  verb  nnj  is  never  applied 
to  ordinary  slaughtering  (for  which  tariK^  is  the  verb  used),  except 
in  chap.  xii.  15  and  21  in  connection  with  the  repeal  of  the  law 
that  every  slaughtering  was  to  be  a  ^'^^^^  nat  (Lev.  xvii.  5) ;  and 
there  the  use  of  the  word  HDT,  instead  of  ^^n^,  may  be  accounted 
for  from  the  allusion  to  this  particular  law.  At  the  same  time,  the 
Jewish  tradition  is  probably  right,  when  it  understands  by  the 
nn-tn  ••nnf  in  this  verse,  kut  olkov  Oveiv  evoy^la^  eveKa  (Josephus),  or 
efft)  Tov  ^(OfJLov  dvofiivoi^  eveKa  Kpe(D(j)ayLa<;  (Philo),  or,  as  in  the 
Mishnah  Choi.  (x.  1),  refers  the  gift  prescribed  in  this  passage  to 
the  jvin,  prof  ana,  and  not  to  the  \'&^\>'\'0^  consecrata,  that  is  to  say, 
places  it  in  the  same  category  with  the  first-fruits,  the  tithe  of 
tithes,  and  other  less  holy  gifts,  which  might  be  consumed  outside 
the  court  of  the  temple  and  the  holy  city  (compare  Reland,  Antiqg, 
SB.  P.  ii.  c.  4,  §  11,  with  P.  ii.  c.  8,  §  10).  In  all  probability,  the 
reference  is  to  the  slaughtering  of  oxen,  sheep,  or  goats  which  were 
not  intended  for  shelamim  in  the  more  limited  sense,  i.e.  for  one  of 
the  three  species  of  peace-offerings  (Lev.  vii.  15,  16),  but  for  festal 
meals  in  the  broader  sense,  which  were  held  in  connection  with  the 


390  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

sacrificial  meals  prepared  from  the  shelamim.  For  it  is  evident 
that  the  meals  held  by  the  people  at  the  annual  feasts  when  they 
had  to  appear  before  the  Lord  were  not  all  shelamim  meals,  but  that 
other  festal  meals  were  held  in  connection  with  these,  in  which  the 
priests  and  Levites  were  to  share,  from  the  laws  laid  down  with 
reference  to  the  so-called  second  tithe,  which  could  not  only  be 
turned  into  money  by  those  who  lived  at  a  great  distance  from  the 
sanctuary,  such  money  to  be  applied  to  the  purchase  of  the  things 
required  for  the  sacrificial  meals  at  the  place  of  the  sanctuary,  but 
which  might  also  be  appropriated  every  third  year  to  the  preparation 
of  love-feasts  for  the  poor  in  the  different  towns  of  the  land  (chap, 
xiv.  22-29).  For  in  this  case  the  animals  were  not  slaughtered  or 
sacrificed  as  shelamim,  at  all  events  not  in  the  latter  instance,  be- 
cause the  slaughtering  did  not  take  place  at  the  sanctuary.  If 
therefore  we  restrict  the  gift  prescribed  here  to  the  slaughtering  of 
oxen  and  sheep  or  goats  for  such  sacrificial  meals  in  the  wider  sense, 
not  only  are  the  difficulties  connected  with  the  execution  of  this 
command  removed,  but  also  the  objection,  which  arises  out  of  the 
general  use  of  the  expression  nnt  nnt,  to  the  application  of  this 
expression  to  every  slaughtering  that  took  place  for  domestic  use. 
And  beside  this,  the  passage  in  1  Sam.  ii.  13-16,  to  which  Calvin 
calls  attention,  furnishes  a  historical  proof  that  the  priests  could 
claim  a  portion  of  the  flesh  of  the.slain-offerings  in  addition  to  the 
heave-leg  and  wave-breast,  since  it  is  there  charged  as  a  sin  on  the 
part  of  the  sons  of  Eli,  not  only  that  they  took  out  of  the  cauldrons 
as  much  of  the  flesh  which  was  boiling  as  they  could  take  up  with 
three-pronged  forks,  but  that  before  the  fat  was  burned  upon  the 
altar  they  asked  for  the  pieces  which  belonged  to  the  priest,  to  be 
given  to  them  not  cooked,  but  raw.  From  this  Michaelis  has  drawn 
the  correct  conclusion,  that  even  at  that  time  the  priests  had  a  right 
to  claim  that,  in  addition  to  the  portions  of  the  sacrifices  appointed 
by  Moses  in  Lev.  vii.  34,  a  further  portion  of  the  thank-offerings 
should  be  given  to  them ;  though  he  does  not  regard  the  passage  as 
referring  to  the  law  before  us,  since  he  supposes  this  to  relate  to 
every  slaughtered  animal  which  was  not  placed  upon  the  altar. 

In  ver.  4,  Moses  repeats  the  law  concerning  the  first-fruits  in 
Num.  xviii.  12,  13  (cf.  Ex.  xxii.  28),  for  the  purpose  df  extending 
it  to  the  first  produce  of  the  sheep-shearing. — Ver.  5.  The  reason 
for  the  right  accorded  to  the  priests  w^as  the  choice  of  them  for  the 
office  of  standing  "  to  minister  in  the  name  of  Jehovah,"  sc.  for  all 
the  tribes.     "  In  the  name  of  Jehovah,^^  not  merely  by  the  appoint- 


CHAP.  XVIII.  1-8.  391 

ment,  but  also  in  the  power  of  the  Lord,  as  mediators  of  His  grace. 
The  words  "  he  and  Ms  sons  "  point  back  quite  to  the  Mosaic  times, 
in  which  Aaron  and  his  sons  held  the  priest's  office.— Vers.  6-8.  As 
the  priests  were  to  be  remembered  for  their  service  on  the  part  of 
the  people  (vers.  3-5),  so  the  Levite  also,  who  came  from  one  of 
the  towns  of  the  land  with  all  the  desire  of  his  soul  to  the  place  of 
the  sanctuary,  to  minister  there  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  was  to 
eat  a  similar  portion  to  all  his  Levitical  brethren  who  stood  there  in 
service  before  the  Lord.     The  verb  n^a  (sojourned)  does  not  pre- 
suppose that  the  Levites  were  houseless,  but  simply  that  they  had 
no  hereditary  possession  in  the  land  as  the  other  tribes  had,  and 
merely  lived  like  sojourners  among  the  Israelites  in  the  towns  which 
were  given  up  to  them  by  the  other  tribes  (see  at  chap.  xii.  12). 
''All  his  brethren  the  Levites"  are  the  priests  and  those  Levites 
who  officiated  at  the  sanctuary  as  assistants  to  the  priests.     It  is 
assumed,  therefore,  that  only  a  part  of  the  Levites  were  engaged  at 
the  sanctuary,  and  the  others  lived  in  their  towns.     The  apodosis 
follows  in  ver.  8,  ''part  like  part  shall  they  eat"  sc.  the  new-comer 
and  those  already  there.     The  former  was  to  have  the  same  share 
to  eat  as  the  latter,  and  to  be  maintained  from  the  revenues  of  the 
sanctuary.     These  revenues  are  supposed  to  be  already  apportioned 
by  the  previous  laws,  so  that  they  by  no  means  abolish  the  distinc- 
tion between  priests  and  Levites.     We  are  not  to  think  of  those 
portions  of  the  sacrifices  and  first-fruits  only  which  fell  to  the 
lot  of  the  priests,  nor  of  the  tithe  alone,  or  of  the  property  which 
flowed  into  the  sanctuary  through  vows  or  free-will  offerings,  or  in 
any  other  way,  and  was  kept  in  the  treasury  and  storehouse,  but  of 
tithes,  sacrificial  portions,  and  free-will  offerings  generally,  which 
were  not  set  apart  exclusively  for  the  priests.    '1^1  ^''1^^^  "l^-?,  "  beside 
his  sold  with  the  fathers"  i.e.  independently  of  what  he  receives 
from  the  sale  of  his  patrimony.    "^3?pP,  the  sale,  then  the  thing  sold, 
and  the  price  or  produce  of  what  is  sold,  like  "^^O  in  Num.  xx.  19. 
^J?  is  unusual  without  jO,   and  Knohel  would  read  ViDlsp    from 
in3D  and  IP,  in  consequence,     nnsn  hv  stands  for  nnxTT'S  bv  (see 
at  Ex.  vi.  25 ;  Kara  rr)v  Trarpiav,  LXX.),  according  to  or  with  the 
fathers'  houses,  i.e.  the  produce  of  the  property  which  he  possesses 
according  to  his  family  descent,  or   which  is  with  his  kindred. 
Whether  hv  in  this  passage  signifies  "  according  to  the  measure 
of,"  or  "  with,"  in  the  sense  of  keeping  or  administering,  cannot  be 
decided.     As  the  law  in  Lev.  xxv.  33,  34,  simply  forbids  the  sale  of 
the  pasture  grounds  belonging  to  the  Levites,  but  permits  the  sale 


392  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

of  their  houses,  a  Levite  who  went  to  the  sanctuary  might  either 
let  his  property  in  the  Levitical  town,  and  draw  the  yearly  rent,  or 
sell  the  house  which  belonged  to  him  there.  In  any  case,  these 
words  furnish  a  convincing  proof  that  there  is  no  foundation  for 
the  assertion  that  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  assumes  or  affirms  that 
the  Levites  were  absolutely  without  possessions. 

Vers.  9-22.  The  Gift  of  Prophecy. — The  Levitical  priests, 
as  the  stated  guardians  and  promoters  of  the  law,  had  to  conduct 
all  the  affairs  of  Israel  with  the  Lord,  not  only  instructing  the 
people  out  of  the  law  concerning  the  will  of  God,  but  sustaining 
and  promoting  the  living  fellowship  with  the  Lord  both  of  indivi- 
duals and  of  the  whole  congregation,  by  the  offering  of  sacrifices 
and  service  at  the  altar.  But  if  the  covenant  fellowship  with 
Himself  and  His  grace,  in  which  Jehovah  had  placed  Israel  as  His 
people  of  possession,  was  to  be  manifested  and  preserved  as  a  living 
reality  amidst  all  changes  in  the  political  development  of  the  nation 
and  in  the  circumstances  of  private  life,  it  would  not  do  for  the 
revelations  from  God  to  cease  with  the  giving  of  the  law  and  the 
death  of  Moses.  For,  as  Schultz  observes,  ''  however  the  revelation 
of  the  law  might  aim  at  completeness,  and  even  have  regard  to  the 
more  remote  circumstances  of  the  future,  as,  for  example,  where  the 
king  is  referred  to ;  yet  in  the  transition  from  extraordinary  circum- 
stances into  a  more  settled  condition,  which  it  foretells  in  chap.  xvii. 
14,  and  which  actually  took  place  under  Samuel  when  the  nation 
grew  older  (chap.  iv.  25),  and  in  the  decline  and  apostasy  which 
certainly  awaited  it  according  to  chap.  xxxi.  16-29,  when  false 
prophets  should  arise,  by  whom  they  were  in  danger  of  being  led 
astray  (chap.  xiii.  2  and  xviii.  20),  a?  well  as  in  the  restoration 
which  would  follow  after  the  infliction  of  punishment  (chap.  iv. 
29,  30,  XXX.  1  sqq) ;  in  all  these  great  changes  which  awaited  Israel 
from  inward  necessity,  the  revelation  of  the  will  of  the  Lord  which 
they  possessed  in  the  law  would  nevertheless  be  insufficient."  The 
priesthood,  with  its  ordinances,  would  not  suffice  for  that.  As  the 
promise  of  direct  communications  from  God  through  the  Urim  and 
Thummim  of  the  high  priest  was  restricted  to  the  single  circum- 
stance of  the  right  of  the  whole  congregation  being  endangered, 
and  did  not  extend  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  religious  necessities 
of  individuals,  it  could  afford  no  godly  satisfaction  to  that  desire 
for  supernatural  knowledge  which  arose  at  times  in  the  hearts  of 
individuals,  and  for  which  the  heathen  oracles  made  such  ample 


CHAP.  XVIII.  9-22.  393 

provision  in  ungodly  ways.  If  Israel  therefore  was  to  be  preserved 
in  faithfulness  towards  God,  and  attain  the  end  of  its  calling  as  the 
congregation  of  the  Lord,  it  was  necessary  that  the  Lord  should 
make  known  His  counsel  and  will  at  the  proper  time  through  the 
medium  of  prophets,  and  bestow  upon  it  in  sure  prophetic  words 
what  the  heathen  nations  endeavoured  to  discover  and  secure  by 
means  of  augury  and  soothsaying.  This  is  the  point  of  view  from 
which  Moses  promises  the  sending  of  prophets  in  vers.  15-18,  and 
lays  down  in  vers.  19-22  the  criteria  for  distinguishing  between 
true  and  false  prophets,  as  we  may  clearly  see  from  the  fact  that 
in  vers.  9-14  he  introduces  this  promise  with  a  warning  against 
resorting  to  heathen  augury,  soothsaying,  and  witchcraft. 

Vers.  9  sqq.  When  Israel  came  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  it 
was  "  710^  to  learn  to  do  like  the  abominations  of  these  nations^'  (the 
Canaanites  or  heathen).  There  was  not  to  be  found  in  it  any  who 
caused  his  son  or  his  daughter  to  pass  through  the  fire,  i.e.  any 
worshipper  of  Moloch  (see  at  Lev.  xviii.  21),  or  one  who  practised 
soothsaying  (see  at  Num.  xxiii.  23),  or  a  wizard  (see  at  Lev.  xix. 
26),  or  a  snake-charmer  (see  at  Lev.  xix.  26),  or  a  conjurer,  or  one 
who  pronounced  a  ban  ("i^n  "lih^  probably  referring  to  the  custom 
of  binding  or  banning  by  magical  knots),  a  necromancer  and  wise 
man  (see  at  Lev.  xix.  31),  or  one  who  asked  the  dead,  i.e.  who 
sought  oracles  from  the  dead.  Moses  groups  together  all  the  words 
which  the  language  contained  for  the  different  modes  of  exploring 
the  future  and  discovering  the  will  of  God,  for  the  purpose  of  for- 
bidding every  description  of  soothsaying,  and  places  the  prohibition 
of  Moloch-worship  at  the  head,  to  show  the  inward  connection 
between  soothsaying  and  idolatry,  possibly  because  februation,  or 
passing  children  through  the  fire  in  the  worship  of  Moloch,  was 
more  intimately  connected  with  soothsaying  and  magic  than  any 
other  description  of  idolatry. — Ver.  12.  Whoever  did  this  was  an 
abomination  to  the  Lord,  and  it  was  because  of  this  abomination 
that  He  rooted  out  the  Canaanites  before  Israel  (cf.  Lev.  xviii.  24 
sqq.). — Vers.  13  and  14.  Israel,  on  the  other  hand,  was  to  be  blame- 
less with  Jehovah  (pV,  in  its  intercourse  with  the  Lord).  Though 
the  heathen  whom  they  exterminated  before  them  hearkened  to 
conjurers  and  soothsayers,  Jehovah  their  God  had  not  allowed 
anything  of  the  kind  to  them.  nriKI  is  placed  first  as  a  nominative 
absolute,  for  the  sake  of  emphasis :  "  but  thou,  so  far  as  thou  art 
concernedj  not  so.^^  13,  thus,  just  so,  such  things  (cf.  Ex.  x.  14). 
jn^,  to  grant,  to   allow  (as  in  Gen.  xx.   6,  etc.). — Ver.  15.  "-4 


394  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

prophet  out  of  the  midst  of  thee,  out  of  thy  hrethren,  as  /  am,  will 
Jehovah  thy  God  raise  up  to  thee ;  to  him  shall  ye  hearhenP  When 
Moses  thus  attaches  to  the  prohibition  against  hearkening  to  sooth- 
sayers and  practising  soothsaying,  the  promise  that  Jehovah  would 
raise  up  a  prophet,  etc.,  and  contrasts  what  the  Lord  would  do  for 
His  people  with  what  He  did  not  allow,  it  is  perfectly  evident  from 
this  simple  connection  alone,  apart  from  the  further  context  of  the 
passage,  in  which  Moses  treats  of  the  temporal  and  spiritual  rulers 
of  Israel  (chap.  xvii.  and  xviii.),  that  the  promise  neither  relates  to 
one  particular  prophet,  nor  directly  and  exclusively  to  the  Messiah, 
but  treats  of  the  sending  of  prophets  generally.  And  this  is  also 
confirmed  by  what  follows  with  reference  to  true  and  false  prophets, 
which  presupposes  the  rise  of  a  plurality  of  prophets,  and  shows 
most  incontrovertibly  that  it  is  not  one  prophet  only,  nor  the  Messiah 
exclusively,  who  is  promised  here.  It  by  no  means  follows  from  the 
use  of  the  singular,  "  a  prophet,"  that  Moses  is  speaking  of  one 
particular  prophet  only  ;  but  the  idea  expressed  is  this,  that  at  any 
time  when  the  people  stood  in  need  of  a  mediator  with  God  like 
Moses,  God  would  invariably  send  a  prophet.  The  words,  "  out  of 
the  midst  of  thee,  of  thy  brethren,"  imply  that  there  would  be  no 
necessity  for  Israel  to  turn  to  heathen  soothsayers  or  prophets,  but 
that  it  would  find  the  men  within  itself  who  would  make  known  the 
word  of  the  Lord.  The  expression,  "  like  unto  me,"  is  explained  by 
what  follows  in  vers.  16-18  with  regard  to  the  circumstances,  under 
which  the  Lord  had  given  the  promise  that  He  would  send  a 
prophet.  It  was  at  Sinai ;  when  the  people  were  filled  with  mortal 
alarm,  after  hearing  the  ten  words  which  God  addressed  to  them  out 
of  the  fire,  and  entreated  Moses  to  act  as  mediator  between  the  Lord 
and  themselves,  that  God  might  not  speak  directly  to  them  any  more. 
At  that  time  the  Lord  gave  the  promise  that  He  would  raise  up  a 
prophet,  and  put  His  words  into  his  mouth,  that  he  might  speak  to 
the  people  all  that  the  Lord  commanded  (cf.  chap.  v.  20  sqq.). 
The  promised  prophet,  therefore,  was  to  resemble  Moses  in  this 
respect,  that  he  would  act  as  mediator  between  Jehovah  and  the 
people,  and  make  known  the  words  or  the  will  of  the  Lord.  Conse- 
quently the  meaning  contained  in  the  expression  "  like  unto  me"  was 
not  that  the  future  prophet  would  resemble  Moses  in  all  respects, — 
a  meaning  which  has  been  introduced  into  it  through  an  unwarrant- 
able use  of  Num.  xii.  6-8,  Deut.  xxxiv.  10,  and  Heb.  iii.  2,  5,  for 
the  purpose  of  proving  the  direct  application  of  the  promise  to  the 
Messiah  alone,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament. 


CHAP.  XVIIl.  9-22.  395 

If  the  resemblance  of  the  future  prophet  to  Moses,  expressed  in  the 
words  "  like  unto  me,"  be  understood  as  indicating  the  precise  form 
in  which  God  revealed  Himself  to  Moses,  speaking  with  him  mouth 
to  mouth,  and  not  in  a  dream  or  vision,  a  discrepancy  is  introduced 
between  this  expression  and  the  words  which  follow  in  ver.  18,  "  I 
will  put  My  words  in  his  mouth ; "  since  this  expresses  not  the  par- 
ticular mode  in  which  Moses  received  the  revelations  from  God, 
in  contrast  with  the  rest  of  the  prophets,  but  simply  that  form  of 
divine  communication  or  inspiration  which  was  common  to  all  the 
prophets  (vid,  Jer.  i.  9,  v.  14). 

But  whilst  we  are  obliged  to  give  up  the  direct  and  exclusive 
reference  of  this  promise  to  the  Messiah,  which  was  the  prevailing 
opinion  in  the  early  Church,  and  has  been  revived  by  Kurtz,  Auber- 
len,  and  Tholuck,  as  not  in  accordance  with  the  context  or  the  words 
themselves,  we  cannot,  on  the  other  hand,  agree  with  v.  ITofmann, 
Baur,  and  Knohel,  in  restricting  the  passage  to  the  Old  Testament 
prophets,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  Messiah.  There  is  no  warrant  for 
this  limitation  of  the  word  "  prophet,"  since  the  expectation  of  the 
Messiah  was  not  unknown  to  Moses  and  the  Israel  of  his  time,  but 
was  actually  expressed  in  the  promise  of  the  seed  of  the  woman, 
and  Jacob's  prophecy  concerning  Shiloh ;  so  that  0,  v.  Gerlach  is 
perfectly  right  in  observing,  that  "  this  is  a  prediction  of  Christ  as 
the  true  Prophet,  precisely  like  that  of  the  seed  of  the  woman  in 
Gen.  iii.  15."  The  occasion,  also,  on  which  Moses  received  the 
promise  of  the  "  prophet"  from  the  Lord,  which  he  here  communi- 
cated to  the  people, — namely,  when  the  people  desired  a  mediator 
between  themselves  and  the  Lord  at  Sinai,  and  this  desire  on  their 
part  was  pleasing  to  the  Lord, — shows  that  the  promise  should  be 
understood  in  the  full  sense  of  the  words,  without  any  limitation 
whatever ;  that  is  to  say,  that  Christ,  in  whom  the  prophetic  cha- 
racter culminated  and  was  completed,  is  to  be  included.  Even 
Ewald  admits,  that  "  the  prophet  like  unto  Moses,  whom  God 
would  raise  up  out  of  Israel  and  for  Israel,  can  only  be  the  true 
prophet  generally ;"  and  Baur  also  allows,  that  "  historical  expo- 
sition will  not  mistake  the  anticipatory  reference  of  this  expression 
to  Christ,  which  is  involved  in  the  expectation  that,  in  the  future 
completion  of  the  plan  of  salvation,  the  prophetic  gift  would  form 
an  essential  element."  And  lastly,  the  comparison  instituted  be- 
tween the  promised  prophet  and  Moses,  compels  us  to  regard  the 
words  as  referring  to  the  Messiah.  The  words,  "  like  unto  me," 
"  like  unto  thee,"  no  more  warrant  us  in  excluding  the  Messiah  on 


396  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  AIOSES. 

the  one  hand,  than  in  excluding  the  Old  Testament  prophets  on  the 
other,  since  it  is  unquestionably  affirmed  that  the  prophet  of  the 
future  would  be  as  perfectly  equal  to  his  calling  as  Moses  was  to 
his,^ — that  He  would  carry  out  the  mediation  between  the  Lord  and 
the  people  in  the  manner  and  the  power  of  Moses.  In  this  respect 
not  one  of  the  Old  Testament  prophets  was  fully  equal  to  Moses, 
as  is  distinctly  stated  in  chap,  xxxiv.  10.  All  the  prophets  of  the 
Old  Testament  stood  within  the  sphere  of  the  economy  of  the  law, 
which  was  founded  through  the  mediatorial  office  of  Moses ;  and 
even  in  their  predictions  of  the  future,  they  simply  continued  to 
build  upon  the  foundation  which  was  laid  by  Moses,  and  therefore 
prophesied  of  the  coming  of  the  servant  of  the  Lord,  who,  as  the 
Prophet  of  all  prophets,  would  restore  Jacob,  and  carry  out  the  law 
and  right  of  the  Lord  to  the  nations,  even  to  the  end  of  the  world 
(Isa.  xlii.,  xlix.,  1.,  Ixi.).  This  prophecy,  therefore,  is  very  properly 
referred  to  Jesus  Christ  in  the  New  Testament,  as  having  been 
fulfilled  in  Him.  Not  only  had  Philip  this  passage  in  his  mind 
when  he  said  to  Nathanael,  "  We  have  found  Him  of  whom  Moses 
in  the  law  did  write,  Jesus  of  Nazareth,'*  whilst  Stephen  saw  the 
promise  of  the  prophet  like  unto  Moses  fulfilled  in  Christ  (Acts  vii. 
37)  ;  but  Peter  also  expressly  quotes  it  in  Acts  iii.  22,  23,  as  refer- 
ring to  Christ ;  and  even  the  Lord  applies  it  to  Himself  in  John  v. 
45-47,  when  He  says  to  the  Jews,  "  Moses,  in  whom  ye  trust,  will 
accuse  you ;  for  if  ye  believed  Moses,  ye  would  also  believe  Me :  for 
Moses  wrote  of  Me."  In  John  xii.  48-50,  again,  the  reference  to 
vers.  18  and  19  of  this  chapter  is  quite  unmistakeable ;  and  in  the 
words,  "  hear  ye  Him,"  which  were  uttered  from  the  cloud  at  the 
transfiguration  of  Jesus  (Matt.  xvii.  5),  the  expression  in  ver.  15, 
"  unto  Him  shall  ye  hearken,"  is  used  verbatim  with  reference  to 
Christ.  Even  the  Samaritans  founded  their  expectation  of  the 
Messiah  (John  iv.  25)  upon  these  words  of  Moses.^ 

Vers.  16-22.  With  this  assurance  the  Lord  had  fully  granted 
the  request  of  the  people,  "  according  to  all  that  thou  desiredst  of 
the  Lord  thy  God ;"  and  Israel,  therefore,  was  all  the  more  bound 
to  hearken  to  the  prophets,  whom  God  would  raise  up  from  the 
midst  of  itself,  and  not  to  resort  to  heathen  soothsayers.     (On  the 

^  Let  any  one  paraphrase  the  passage  thus  :  "  A  prophet  inferior  indeed  to 
me,  but  yet  the  channel  of  divine  revelations,"  and  he  will  soon  feel  how  un- 
suitable it  is"  (Hengstenherg). 

^  On  the  history  of  the  exposition  of  this  passage,  see  Hengstenberg^s  Chris- 
tology. 


CHAP.  XIX.  1-13.  397 

fact  itself,  comp.  chap.  v.  20  sqq.  with  Ex.  xx.  15-17.)  "  In  tlie 
day  of  the  assemhly^^  as  in  chap.  ix.  10,  x.  4. — The  instructions  as 
to  their  behaviour  towards  the  propliets  are  given  by  Moses  (vers. 
19,  20)  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  for  the  purpose  of  enforcing  obe- 
dience with  all  the  greater  emphasis.  Whoever  did  not  hearken 
to  the  words  of  the  prophet  who  spoke  in  the  name  of  the  Lord, 
of  him  the  Lord  would  require  it,  i.e.  visit  the  disobedience  with 
punishment  (cf.  Ps.  x.  4,  13).  On  the  other  hand,  the  prophet  who 
spoke  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  w^hat  the  Lord  had  not  commanded 
him,  i.e.  proclaimed  the  thoughts  of  his  own  heart  as  divine  revela- 
tions (cf.  Num.  xvi.  28),  should  die,  like  the  prophet  who  spoke  in 
the  name  of  other  gods.  With  riDlj  the  predicate  is  introduced  in 
the  form  of  an  apodosis. — Vers.  21,  22.  The  false  prophet  was  to 
be  discovered  by  the  fact,  that  the  word  proclaimed  by  him  did  not 
follow  or  come  to  pass,  i.e.  that  his  prophecy  was  not  fulfilled.  Of 
him  they  were  not  to  be  afraid.  By  this  injunction  the  occurrence 
of  what  had  been  predicted  is  made  the  criterion  of  true  prophecy, 
and  not  signs  and  wonders,  which  false  prophets  could  also  per- 
form (cf.  chap.  xiii.  2  sqq.). 

Laws  concerning  the  Cities  of  Refuge,  the  Sacredness  of  Landmarks^ 
and  the  Punishment  of  False  Witnesses. — Chap.  xix. 

After  laying  down  the  most  important  features  in  the  national 
constitution,  Moses  glances  at  the  manifold  circumstances  of  civil 
and  family  life,  and  notices  in  this  and  the  two  following  chapters 
the  different  ways  in  which  the  lives  of  individuals  might  be  endan- 
gered, for  the  purpose  of  awakening  in  the  minds  of  the  people  a 
holy  reverence  for  human  life. 

Vers.  1-13.  The  laws  concerninfij  the  cities  of  refuge  for 
UNINTENTIONAL  MANSLAYERS  are  not  a  mere  repetition  of  the  laws 
given  in  Num.  xxxv.  9-34,  but  rather  an  admonition  to  carry  out 
those  laws,  with  special  reference  to  the  future  extension  of  the 
boundaries  of  the  land. — Vers.  1—7.  As  Moses  had  already  set  apart 
the  cities  of  refuge  for  the  land  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan  (chap, 
iv.  41  sqq.),  he  is  speaking  here  simply  of  the  land  on  the  west, 
which  Israel  was  to  take  possession  of  before  long ;  and  supplements 
the  instructions  in  Num.  xxxv.  14,  with  directions  to  maintain  the 
roads  to  the  cities  of  refuge  which  were  to  be  set  apart  in  Canaan 
itself,  and  to  divide  the  land  into  three  parts,  viz.  for  the  purpose 
of  setting  apart  these  cities,  so  that  one  city  might  be  chosen  for 
the  purpose  in  every  third  of  the  land.     For  further  remarks  upon 


398  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

this  point,  as  well  as  with  regard  to  the  use  of  these  cities  (vers. 
4-7),  see  at  Num.  xxxv.  11  sqq. — In  vers.  8-10  there  follow  the 
fresh  instructions,  that  if  the  Lord  should  extend  the  borders  of 
Israel,  according  to  His  promise  given  to  the  patriarchs,  and  should 
give  them  the  whole  land  from  the  Nile  to  the  Euphrates,  according 
to  Gen.  XV.  18,  they  were  to  add  three  other  cities  of  refuge  to  these 
three,  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  the  shedding  of  innocent  blood. 
The  three  new  cities  of  refuge  cannot  be  the  three  appointed  in 
Num.  XXXV.  14  for  the  land  on  this  side  of  the  Jordan,  nor  the 
three  mentioned  in  ver.  7  on  the  other  side  of  Jordan,  as  Knohel 
and  others  suppose.  Nor  can  we  adopt  Hengstenherg' s  view,  that  the 
three  new  ones  are  the  same  as  the  three  mentioned  in  vers.  2  and 
7,  since  they  are  expressly  distinguished  from  "  these  three."  The 
meaning  is  altogether  a  different  one.  The  circumstances  supposed 
by  Moses  never  existed,  since  the  Israelites  did  not  fulfil  the  con- 
ditions laid  down  in  ver.  9,  viz.  that  they  should  keep  the  law  faith- 
fully, and  love  the  Lord  their  God  (cf.  chap.  iv.  6,  vi.  5,  etc.).  The 
extension  of  the  power  of  Israel  to  the  Euphrates  under  David  and 
Solomon,  did  not  bring  the  land  as  far  as  this  river  into  their  actual 
possession,  since  the  conquered  kingdoms  of  Aram  were  still  inha- 
bited by  the  Aramaeans,  who,  though  conquered,  were  only  rendered 
tributary.  And  the  Tyrians  and  Phoenicians,  who  belonged  to  the 
Canaanitish  population,  were  not  even  attacked  by  David. — ^Ver.  10. 
Innocent  blood  would  be  shed  if  the  unintentional  manslayer  was 
not  protected  against  the  avenger  of  blood,  by  the  erection  of  cities 
of  refuge  in  every  part  of  the  land.  If  Israel  neglected  this  duty, 
it  would  bring  blood-guiltiness  upon  itself  ("  and  so  blood  he  upon 
thee"),  because  it  had  not  done  what  was  requisite  to  prevent  the 
shedding  of  innocent  blood. — Vers.  11-13.  But  whatever  care  was 
to  be  taken  by  means  of  free  cities  to  prevent  the  shedding  of  blood, 
the  cities  of  refuge  were  not  to  be  asyla  for  criminals  who  were 
deserving  of  death,  nor  to  afford  protection  to  those  who  had  slain 
a  neighbour  out  of  hatred.  If  such  murderers  should  flee  to  the 
free  city,  the  elders  (magistrates)  of  his  own  town  were  to  fetch 
him  out,  and  deliver  him  up  to  the  avenger  of  blood,  that  he  might 
die.  The  law  laid  down  in  Num.  xxxv.  16-21  is  here  still  more 
minutely  defined ;  but  this  does  not  transfer  to  the  elders  the  duty 
of  instituting  a  judicial  inquiry,  and  deciding  the  matter,  as  JRiehm 
follows  Vater  and  Be  Wette  in  maintaining,  for  the  purpose  of 
proving  that  there  is  a  discrepancy  between  Deuteronomy  and  the 
previous  legislation.     They  are  simply  commanded  to  perform  the 


CHAP.  XIX.  15-21.  399 

duty  devolving  upon  them  as  magistrates  and  administrators  of 
local  affairs.     (On  ver.  13,  see  chap.  xiii.  8  and  5.) 

Yer.  14.  The  prohibition  against  removing  a  neighbour's 
LANDMARK,  which  his  ancestors  had  placed,  is  inserted  here,  not 
because  landmarks  were  of  special  importance  in  relation  to  the 
free  cities,  and  the  removal  of  them  might  possibly  be  fatal  to  the 
unintentional  manslayer  (as  Clericus  and  Rosenmuller  assume),  for 
the  general  terras  of  the  prohibition  are  at  variance  with  this,  viz. 
"  thy  neighbour's  landmark,"  and  "  in  thine  inheritance  which  thou 
shalt  inherit  in  the  land;"  but  on  account  of  the  close  connection 
in  which  a  man's  possession  as  the  means  of  his  support  stood  to 
the  life  of  the  man  himself,  "  because  property  by  which  life  is 
supported  participates  in  the  sacredness  of  life  itself,  just  as  in 
chap.  XX.  19,  20,  sparing  the  fruit-trees  is  mentioned  in  connection 
with  the  men  who  were  to  be  spared"  (Schultz).  A  curse  was  to 
be  pronounced  upon  the  remover  of  landmarks,  according  to  chap, 
xxvii.  17,  just  as  upon  one  who  cursed  his  father,  who  led  a  bhnd 
man  astray,  or  perverted  the  rights  of  orphans  and  widows  (cf. 
Hos.  V.  10 ;  Prov.  xxii.  28,  xxiii.  10).  Landmarks  were  regarded 
as  sacred  among  other  nations  also ;  by  the  Romans,  for  example, 
they  were  held  to  be  so  sacred,  that  whoever  removed  them  was  to 
be  put  to  death. 

Vers.  15-21.  The  Punishivient  of  a  False  Witness. — To 
secure  life  and  property  against  false  accusations,  Moses  lays  down 
the  law  in  ver.  15,  that  one  witness  only  was  not  "  to  rise  up  against 
any  one  with  reference  to  any  crime  or  sin,  with  every  sin  that  one 
commits"  (i.e.  to  appear  before  a  court  of  justice,  or  be  accepted  as 
sufficient),  but  everything  was  to  be  established  upon  the  testimony 
of  two  or  three  witnesses.  The  rule  laid  down  in  chap.  xvii.  6  and 
Num.  XXXV.  30  for  capital  crimes,  is  raised  hereby  into  a  law  of 
general  application  (see  at  Num.  xxxv.  30).  D^p  (in  ver.  15b),  to 
stand,  i.e.  to  acquire  legal  force. — But  as  it  was  not  always  possible 
to  bring  forward  two  or  three  witnesses,  and  the  statement  of  one 
witness  could  not  well  be  disregarded,  in  vers.  16-1 8  Moses  refers 
accusations  of  this  kind  to  the  higher  tribunal  at  the  sanctuary  for 
investigation  and  decision,  and  appoints  the  same  punishment  for  a 
false  witness,  which  would  have  fallen  upon  the  person  accused,  if 
he  had  been  convicted  of  the  crime  with  which  he  was  charged. 
Ti'^D  n  ri^3y7j  "  to  testify  against  his  departure"  sc.  from  the  law  of 
God,  not  merely  falling  away  into  idolatry  (chap.  xiii.  6),  but  any 


400  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


kind  of  crime,  as  we  may  gather  from  ver.  19,  which  would  be 
visited  with  capital  punishment. — Ver.  17.  The  two  men  between 
whom  the  dispute  lay,  the  accused  and  the  witness,  were  to  come  | 
before  Jehovah,  viz.  before  the  priests  and  judges  who  should  be  in  MM 
those  days, — namely,  at  the  place  of  the  sanctuary,  where  Jehovah 
dwelt  among  His  people  (cf .  chap.  xvii.  9),  and  not  before  the  local 
courts,  as  Knohel  supposes.  These  judges  were  to  investigate  the 
case  most  thoroughly  (cf.  chap.  xiii.  15)  ;  and  if  the  witness  had 
spoken  lies,  they  were  to  do  to  him  as  he  thought  to  do  to  his 
brother.  The  words  from  "  behold "  to  "  his  brother "  are  paren- 
thetical circumstantial  clauses  :  "  And,  behold,  is  the  icitness  a  false 
vntness,  has  he  spoken  a  lie  against  his  brother  ?  Ye  shall  do,^  etc. 
DlOT,  generally  to  meditate  evil.  On  ver.  20,  see  chap.  xiii.  12. — 
Ver.  21.  The  lex  talionis  was  to  be  applied  without  reserve  (see  at 
Ex.  xxi.  23 ;  Lev.  xxiv.  20).  According  to  Diod.  Sic,  (i.  77),  the 
same  law  existed  in  Egypt  with  reference  to  false  accusers. 

Instructions  for  future  Wars. — Chap.  xx. 

The  instructions  in  this  chapter  have  reference  to  the  wars 
which  Israel  might  wage  in  future  against  non-Canaanitish  nations 
(vers.  15  sqq.),  and  enjoin  it  as  a  duty  upon  the  people  of  God  to 
spare  as  much  as  possible  the  lives  of  their  own  soldiers  and  also  of 
their  enemies.  All  wars  against  their  enemies,  even  though  they 
were  superior  to  them  in  resources,  were  to  be  entered  upon  by  them 
without  fear  in  reliance  upon  the  might  of  their  God ;  and  they  were 
therefore  to  exempt  from  military  service  not  only  those  who  had 
just  entered  into  new  social  relations,  and  had  not  enjoyed  the 
pleasures  of  them,  but  also  the  timid  and  fainthearted  (vers.  1-9). 
Moreover,  whenever  they  besieged  hostile  towns,  they  were  to  ojffer 
peace  to  their  enemies,  excepting  only  the  Canaanites ;  and  even  if 
it  were  not  accepted,  they  were  to  let  the  defenceless  (viz.  women 
and  children)  live,  and  not  to  destroy  the  fruit-trees  before  the 
fortifications  (vers.  10-20). 

Vers.  1-9.  Instructions  relating  to  Military  Service. 
— If  the  Israelites  went  out  to  battle  against  their  foes,  and  saw 
horses  and  chariots,  a  people  more  numerous  than  they  were,  they 
were  not  to  be  afraid,  because  Jehovah  their  God  was  with  them. 
Horses  and  chariots  constituted  the  principal  strength  of  the  ene- 
mies round  about  Israel ;  not  of  the  Egyptians  only  (Ex.  xiv.  7\ 
and  of  the  Canaanites  and  Philistines  (Josh.  xvii.  16  ;  Judg.  iv.  3, 


I 


CHAP.  XX.  1-9.  .  401 

1  Sam.  xiii.  5),  but  of  the  Syrians  also  (2  Sam.  viii.  4 ;  1  Cliroii. 
xviii.  4,  xix.  18;  cf.  Ps.  xx.  8). — Yers.  2-4.  If  they  were  thus 
drawing  near  to  war,  Le.  arranging  themselves  for  war  for  the 
purpose  of  being  mustered  and  marching  in  order  into  the  battle 
(not  just  as  the  battle  was  commencing),  the  priest  was  to  address 
the  warriors,  and  infuse  courage  into  them  by  pointing  to  the  help 
of  the  Lord.  "  The  priest "  is  not  the  high  priest,  but  the  priest 
who  accompanied  the  army,  like  Phinehas  in  the  war  against  the 
Midianites  (Num.  xxxi.  6  ;  cf.  1  Sam.  iv.  4,  11,  2  Chron.  xiii.  12), 
whom  the  Eabbins  call  HDnpipn  n'^m  (the  anointed  of  the  battle), 
and  raise  to  the  highest  dignity  next  to  the  high  priest,  no  doubt 
simply  upon  the  ground  of  Num.  xxxi.  6  (see  Lundius,jud.  Heiligtli. 
p.  523). — Vers.  5-9.  Moreover,  the  shotemm,  whose  duty  it  was,  as 
the  keepers  of  the  genealogical  tables,  to  appoint  the  men  who  were 
bound  to  serve,  were  to  release  such  of  the  men  who  had  been 
summoned  to  the  war  as  had  entered  into  domestic  relations,  which 
would  make  it  a  harder  thing  for  them  to  be  exposed  to  death  than 
for  any  of  the  others  :  for  example,  any  man  who  had  built  a  new 
house  and  had  not  yet  consecrated  it,  or  had  planted  a  vineyard 
and  not  yet  eaten  any  of  the  fruit  of  it,  or  was  betrothed  to  a  wife 
and  had  not  yet  married  her, — that  such  persons  might  not  die 
before  they  had  enjoyed  the  fruits  of  what  they  had  done.  "  Who 
is  the  man,  who,"  i.e.  whoever,  every  man  who.  "  Consecrated  the 
house,"  viz.  by  taking  possession  and  dwelHng  in  it ;  entrance  into 
the  house  was  probably  connected  with  a  hospitable  entertainment. 
According  to  Josephus  (Ant.  iv.  8,  41),  the  enjoyment  of  them  was 
to  last  a  year  (according  to  the  analogy  of  chap.  xxiv.  5).  The 
Rabbins  elaborated  special  ceremonies,  among  which  Jonathan  in 
his  Targum  describes  the  fastening  of  slips  with  sentences  out  of 
the  law  written  upon  them  to  the  door-posts,  as  being  the  most 
important  (see  at  chap.  vi.  9 :  for  further  details,  see  Selden,  de 
Synedriis  1.  iii.  c.  14,  15).  Cerem  is  hardly  to  be  restricted  to 
vineyards,  but  applied  to  olive-plantations  as  well  (see  at  Lev.  xix. 
10).  <>"7,  to  make  common,  is  to  be  explained  from  the  fact,  that 
when  fruit-trees  were  planted  (Lev.  xix.  23  sqq.),^  or  vines  set  (Judg. 
xix.  24),  the  fruit  was  not  to  be  eaten  for  the  first  three  years, 
and  that  of  the  fourth  year  was  to  be  consecrated  to  the  Lord ; 
and  it  was  only  the  fruit  that  was  gathered  in  the  fifth  year  which 
could  be  applied  by  the  owner  to  his  own  use, — in  other  words, 
could  be  made  common.  The  command  to  send  away  from  the 
army  to  his  own  home  a  man  who  was  betrothed  but  had  not  yet 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  2  C 


402  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

taken  his  wife,  is  extended  still  further  in  chap.  xxiv.  5,  where  it 
stated  that  a  newly  married  man  was  to  be  exempt  for  a  whole  year 
from  military  service  and  other  public  burdens.  The  intention  of 
these  instructions  was  neither  to  send  away  all  persons  who  were 
unwilling  to  go  into  the  war,  and  thus  avoid  the  danger  of  their 
interfering  with  the  readiness  and  courage  of  the  rest  of  the  army 
in  prospect  of  the  battle,  nor  to  spare  the  lives  of  those  persons  to 
whom  life  was  especially  dear ;  but  rather  to  avoid  depriving  any 
member  of  the  covenant  nation  of  his  enjoyment  of  the  good  things 
of  this  life  bestowed  upon  him  by  the  Lord. — Ver.  8.  The  first 
intention  only  existed  in  the  case  of  the  timid  (the  soft-hearted  or 
despondent).  DD^  t^h,  that  the  heart  of  thy  brethren  "  may  not  flow 
away^^  Le,  may  not  become  despondent  (as  in  Gen.  xvii.  15,  etc.). 
— Ver.  9.  When  this  was  finished,  the  shoterim  were  to  appoint 
captains  at  the  head  of  the  people  (of  war).  ^ipQ,  to  inspect,  to 
muster,  then  to  give  the  oversight,  to  set  a  person  over  anything 
(Num.  iii.  10,  iv.  27).  The  meaning  "to  lead  the  command" 
(^Schultz)  cannot  be  sustained;  and  if  "captains  of  the  armies'* 
were  the  subject,  and  reference  were  made  to  the  commanders  in 
the  war,  the  article  would  not  be  omitted.  If  the  shoterim  had  to 
raise  men  for  the  war  and  organize  the  army,  the  division  of  the 
men  into  hosts  (zehaotJi)  and  the  appointment  of  the  leaders  would 
also  form  part  of  the  duties  of  their  office. 

Vers.  10-20.  Instructions  concerning  Sieges.— Vers.  10, 
11.  On  advancing  against  a  town  to  attack  it,  they  were  "  to  call 
ap  it  for  peace"  i.e.  to  summon  it  to  make  a  peaceable  surrender 
and  submission  (cf.  Judg.  xxi.  13).  "i/"  it  answered  peace^"  i.e. 
returned  an  answer  conducing  to  peace,  and  ^^ opened"  {sc.  its 
gates),  the  whole  of  its  inhabitants  were  to  become  tributary  to 
Israel,  and  serve  it ;  consequently  even  those  who  were  armed  were 
not  to  be  put  to  death,  for  Israel  was  not  to  shed  blood  unneces- 
sarily. DD  does  not  mean  feudal  service^  but  a  feudal  slave  (see  at 
Ex.  i.  11). — Vers.  12,  13.  If  the  hostile  town,  however,  did  not 
make  peace,  but  prepared  for  war,  the  Israelites  were  to  besiege  it ; 
and  if  Jehovah  gave  it  into  their  hands,  they  were  to  slay  all  the 
men  in  it  without  reserve  ("  with  the  edge  of  the  sword,"  see  at 
Gen.  xxxiv.  26) ;  but  the  women  and  children  and  all  that  was  in 
the  city,  all  its  spoil,  they  were  to  take  as  prey  for  themselves,  and 
to  consume  (eat)  the  spoil,  i.e.  to  make  use  of  it  for  their  own 
maintenance, — Vers.  15-18.  It  was  in  this  way  that  Israel  was  to 


CHAP.  XX.  10-20.  403 

act  with  towns  that  were  far  off ;  but  not  with  the  towns  of  the 
Canaanites  ("  these  nations "),  which  Jehovah  gave  them  for  an 
inheritance.  In  these  no  soul  was  to  be  left  alive;  but  these  nations 
were  to  be  laid  under  the  ban,  i.e.  altogether  exterminated,  that 
they  might  not  teach  the  Israelites  their  abominations  and  sins  (cf. 
chap.  vii.  1-4,  xii.  31).  '"i^?^?"-'??  lit.  every  breath,  i.e.  everything 
living,  by  which,  however,  human  beings  alone  are  to  be  under- 
stood (comp.  Josh.  X.  40,  xi.  11,  with  chap.  xi.  14). — ^Vers.  19,  20. 
When  they  besieged  a  town  a  long  time  to  conquer  it,  they  were 
not  to  destroy  its  trees,  to  swing  the  axe  upon  them.  Tliat  we  are 
to  understand  by  nyV  the  fruit-trees  in  the  environs  and  gardens  of 
the  town,  is  evident  from  the  motive  appended :  "/or  of  them  (13^p 
refers  to  XV  as  a  collective)  thou  eatest,  and  thou  shalt  not  hew  them 
downP  The  meaning  is :  thou  mayest  suppress  and  destroy  the 
men,  but  not  the  trees  which  supply  thee  with  food.  "  For  is  the 
tree  of  the  field  a  man,  that  it  should  come  into  siege  before  theeV* 
This  is  evidently  the  only  suitable  interpretation  of  the  difficult 
words  7\'^}^\}  YV  D'JiJ!^  ^3,  and  the  one  which  has  been  expressed  by 
all  the  older  commentators,  though  in  different  ways.  But  it  is  one 
which  can  only  be  sustained  grammatically  by  adopting  the  view 
propounded  by  Clencus  and  others:  viz.  by  pointing  the  noun  Ci'iKH 
with  n  interrog.,  instead  of  ^^^\},  and  taking  D*]i<  as  the  object, 
which  its  position  in  the  sentence  fully  warrants  (cf.  Ewald,  § 
324,  b,  and  306,  b.).  The  Masoretic  punctuation  is  founded  upon 
the  explanation  given  by  Aben  Ezra,  "  Man  is  a  tree  of  the  field, 
i.e.  lives  upon  and  is  fed  by  the  fruits  of  the  trees,"  which  Schidtz 
expresses  in  this  way,  "  Man  is  bound  up  with  the  tree  of  the  field, 
i.e.  has  his  life  in,  or  from,  the  tree  of  the  field," — an  explanation, 
however,  which  cannot  be  defended  by  appealing  to  chap.  xxiv.  6, 
Eccl.  xii.  13,  Ezek.  xii.  10,  as  these  three  passages  are  of  a  different 
kind.  In  no  way  whatever  can  D^^n  be  taken  as  the  subject  of  the 
sentence,  as  this  would  not  give  any  rational  meaning.  And  if  it 
were  rendered  as  the  object,  in  such  sense  as  this.  The  tree  of  the 
field  is  a  thing  or  affair  of  man,  it  would  hardly  have  the  article. 
— Ver.  20.  "  Only  the  trees  ivhich  thou  knowest  that  they  are  not 
trees  of  eating  (i.e.  do  not  bear  edible  fruits),  mayest  thou  hew  down, 
and  build  a  rampart  against  the  town  till  it  come  down^^  i.e.  fall 
down  from  its  eminence.  For  ^T^  as  applied  to  the  falling  or 
sinking  of  lofty  fortifications,  see  chap,  xxviii.  52,  Isa.  xxxii.  19. 
"^1^9,  compressing  or  forcing  down;  hence,  as  applied  to  towns, 
n^V»l  6^13^  to  come  into  siege,  i.e.  to  be  besieged  (ver.  19 ;  2  Kings 


404  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

xxiv.  10,  XXV.  2).  In  ver.  20  it  is  used  to  denote  the  object,  viz. 
the  means  of  hemming  in  a  town,  i.e.  the  besieging  rampart  (cf. 
Ezek.  iv.  2). 

Expiation  of  an  uncertain  Murder.  Treatment  of  a  Wife  wlio  "had  been 
taJcen  captive.  Right  of  the  First-born,  Punishment  of  a  refrac- 
tory Son,     Burial  of  a  Man  who  had  been  hanged. — Chap.  xxi. 

The  reason  for  grouping  together  these  five  laws,  which  are 
apparently  so  different  from  one  another,  as  well  as  for  attaching 
them  to  the  previous  regulations,  is  to  be  found  in  the  desire  to 
bring  out  distinctly  the  sacredness  of  life  and  of  personal  rights 
from  every  point  of  view,  and  impress  it  upon  the  covenant  nation. 

Vers.  1-9.  Expiation  of  a  Mueder  committed  by  an 
UNKNOWN  Hand. — Vers.  1  and  2.  If  any  one  was  found  lying  in 
a  field  in  the  land  of  Israel  (-'BJ  fallen,  then  lying,  Judg.  iii.  25, 
iv.  22),  having  been  put  to  death  without  its  being  known  who  had 
killed  him  ('lil  IHiJ  iO,  sl  circumstantial  clause,  attached  without  a 
copula,  see  Ewald,  §  341,  b.  3),  the  elders  and  judges,  sc.  of  the 
neighbouring  towns, — the  former  as  representatives  of  the  com- 
munities, the  latter  as  administrators  of  right, — were  to  go  out  and 
measure  to  the  towns  which  lay  round  about  the  slain  man,  i.e. 
measure  the  distance  of  the  body  from  the  towns  that  were  lying 
round  about,  to  ascertain  first  of  all  which  was  the  nearest  town. — 
Vers.  3,  4.  This  nearest  town  was  then  required  to  expiate  the 
blood-guiltiness,  not  only  because  the  suspicion  of  the  crime  or  of 
participation  in  the  crime  fell  soonest  upon  it,  but  because  the  guilt 
connected  with  the  shedding  of  innocent  blood  rested  as  a  burden 
upon  it  before  all  others.  To  this  end  the  elders  were  to  take  a 
heifer  (young  cow),  with  which  no  work  had  ever  been  done,  and 
which  had  not  yet  drawn  in  the  yoke,  i.e.  whose  vital  force  had  not 
been  diminished  by  labour  (see  at  Num.  xix.  2),  and  bring  it  down 
into  a  brook-valley  with  water  constantly  flowing,  and  there  break 
its  neck.  The  expression,  " it  shall  be  that  the  city"  is  more  fully 
defined  by  ''the  elders  of  the  city  shall  taker  The  elders  were  to 
perform  the  act  of  expiation  in  the  name  of  the  city.  As  the 
murderer  was  not  to  be  found,  an  animal  was  to  be  put  to  death  in 
his  stead,  and  suffer  the  punishment  of  the  murderer.  The  slay-  r 
ing  of  the  animal  was  not  an  expiatory  sacrifice,  and  consequently  fl 
there  was  no  slaughtering  and  sprinkling  of  the  blood ;  but,  as  the 
mode  of  death,  viz.  breaking  the  neck  (vid,  Ex.  xiii.  13),  cleai'ly 


I 


CHAP.  XXI.  1-9.  405 

showSj  it  was  a  symbolical  infliction  of  the  punishment  that  should 
have  been  borne  by  the  murderer,  upon  the  animal  which  was 
substituted  for  him.  To  be  able  to  take  the  guilt  upon  itself  and 
bear  it,  the  animal  was  to  be  in  the  full  and  undiminished  pos- 
session of  its  vital  powers.  The  slaying  was  to  take  place  in  a 
10''^  ^--?  ^  valley  with  water  constantly  flowing  through  it,  which 
was  not  worked  (cultivated)  and  sown.  This  regulation  as  to  the 
locality  in  which  the  act  of  expiation  was  to  be  performed  was 
probably  founded  upon  the  idea,  that  the  water  of  the  brook-valley 
would  suck  in  the  blood  and  clean  it  away,  and  that  the  blood 
sucked  in  by  the  earth  would  not  be  brought  to  light  again  by  the 
ploughing  and  working  of  the  soil. — Ver.  5.  The  priests  were  to 
come  near  during  this  transaction ;  i.e.  some  priests  from  the  nearest 
Levitical  town  were  to  be  present  at  it,  not  to  conduct  the  affair, 
but  as  those  whom  Jehovah  had  chosen  tc  serve  Him  and  to  bless 
in  His  name  (cf.  chap,  xviii.  5),  and  according  to  whose  mouth 
(words)  every  dispute  and  every  stroke  happened  (cf.  chap.  xvii. 
8),  i.e.  simply  as  those  who  were  authorized  by  the  Lord,  and  as  the 
representatives  of  the  divine  right,  to  receive  the  explanation  and 
petition  of  the  elders,  and  acknowledge  the  legal  validity  of  the 
act. — Vers.  Q-S.  The  elders  of  the  town  were  to  wash  their  hands 
over  the  slain  heifer,  i.e.  to  cleanse  themselves  by  this  symbolical 
act  from  the  suspicion  of  any  guilt  on  the  part  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  town  in  the  murder  that  had  been  committed  (cf.  Ps.  xxvi. 
6,  Ixxiii.  13 ;  Matt,  xxvii.  24),  and  then  answer  (to  the  charge  in- 
volved in  what  had  taken  place),  and  say,  "  Our  hands  have  not  shed 
this  blood  (on  the  singular  ^^P^,  see  JEwaldy  §  317,  a.),  and  our  eyes 
have  not  seen  "  (sc.  the  shedding  of  blood),  i.e.  we  have  neither  any 
part  in  the  crime  nor  any  knowledge  of  it :  '^  grant  forgiveness  (lit. 
^  cover  up,'  viz.  the  blood-guiltiness)  to  Thy  people  .  .  .  and  give  not 
innocent  blood  in  the  midst  of  Thy  people  Israel"  i.e.  lay  not  upon 
us  the  innocent  blood  that  has  been  shed  by  imputation  and 
punishment.  "  And  the  blood  shall  be  forgiven  them"  i.e.  the 
bloodshed  or  murder  shall  not  be  imputed  to  them.  On  "^33?,  a 
mixed  form  from  the  Niphal  and  Hithpael,  see  Ges.  §  55,  and 
Ewald,  §  132,  c. — ^Ver.  9.  In  this  way  Israel  was  to  wipe  away 
the  innocent  blood  (the  bloodshed)  from  its  midst  (cf.  Num.  xxxv. 
33).  If  the  murderer  were  discovered  afterwards,  of  course  the 
punishment  of  death  which  had  been  inflicted  vicariously  upon  the 
animal,  simply  because  the  criminal  himself  could  not  be  found, 
would  still  fall  upon  him. 


406  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Vers.  10-14.  Treatment  of  a  Wife  who  had  been  a 
Prisoner  of  War. — If  an  Israelite  saw  among  the  captives,  who 
had  been  brought  away  in  a  war  against  foreign  nations,  a  woman 
of  beautiful  figure,  and  loved  her,  and  took  her  as  his  wife,  he  was 
to  allow  her  a  month's  time  in  his  house,  to  bewail  her  separation 
from  her  home  and  kindred,  and  accustom  herself  to  her  new  con- 
dition of  life,  before  he  married  her.  What  is  said  here  does  not 
apply  to  the  wars  with  the  Canaanites,  who  were  to  be  cut  off  (vid, 
chap.  vii.  3),  but,  as  a  comparison  of  the  introductory  words  in  ver. 
1  with  chap.  xx.  1  clearly  shows,  to  the  wars  which  Israel  would 
carry  on  with  surrounding  nations  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan. 
■•2^^  and  nUK^,  the  captivity,  for  the  captives. — ^Vers.  12,  13.  AVhen 
the  woman  was  taken  home  to  the  house  of  the  man  who  had  loved 
her,  she  was  to  shave  her  head,  and  make,  Le.  cut,  her  nails  (cf.  2 
Sam.  xix.  25), — both  customary  signs  of  purification  (on  this  signi- 
fication of  the  cutting  of  the  hair,  see  Lev.  xiv.  8  and  Num.  viii.  7), 
— as  symbols  of  her  passing  out  of  the  state  of  a  slave,  and  of  her 
reception  into  the  fellowship  of  the  covenant  nation.  This  is  per- 
fectly obvious  in  her  laying  aside  her  prisoner's  clothes.  After 
putting  off  the  signs  of  captivity,  she  was  to  sit  (dwell)  in  the 
house,  and  bewail  her  father  and  mother  for  a  month,  i.e.  console 
herself  for  her  separation  from  her  parents,  whom  she  had  lost,  that 
she  might  be  able  to  forget  her  people  and  her  father's  house  (Ps. 
xlv.  11),  and  give  herself  up  henceforth  in  love  to  her  husband 
with  an  undivided  heart.  The  intention  of  tliese  laws  was  not  to 
protect  the  woman  against  any  outbreak  of  rude  passion  on  the 
part  of  the  man,  but  rather  to  give  her  time  and  leisure  to  loosen 
herself  inwardly  from  the  natural  fellowship  of  her  nation  and 
kindred,  and  to  acquire  affection  towards  the  fellowship  of  the 
people  of  God,  into  which  she  had  entered  against  her  will,  that 
her  heart  might  cherish  love  to  the  God  of  Israel,  who  had  given 
her  favour  in  the  eyes  of  her  master,  and  had  taken  from  her 
the  misery  and  reproach  of  slavery.  By  her  master  becoming  her 
husband,  she  entered  into  the  rights  of  a  daughter  of  Israel, 
who  had  been  sold  by  her  father  to  a  man  to  be  his  wife  (Ex. 
xxi.  7  sqq.).  If  after  this  her  husband  should  find  no  pleasure  in 
her,  he  was  to  let  her  go  '"^^p^?,  i.e.  at  her  free  will,  and  not  sell 
her  for  money  (cf.  Ex.  xxi.  8).  "  Thou  shalt  not  put  constraint 
upon  her,  because  thou  hast  humbled  herV  "i^i^O"?,  which  only  occurs 
again  in  chap.  xxiv.  7,  probably  signifies  to  throw  oneself  upon  a 
person,  to  practise  violence  towards  him  (cf.  Ges.  thes.  p.  1046). 


CHAP.  XXI.  15-21.  407 

Vers.  15-17.  The  Eight  or  the  First-born. — ^Whilst  the 
previous  law  was  intended  to  protect  the  slave  taken  in  war  against 
the  caprice  of  her  Israelitish  master,  the  law  which  follows  is  directed 
against  the  abuse  of  paternal  authority  in  favour  of  a  favourite  wife. 
If  a  man  had  two  wives,  of  whom  one  was  beloved  and  the  other  hated, 
— as  was  the  case,  for  example,  with  Jacob, — and  had  sons  by  both 
his  wives,  but  the  first-born  by  the  wife  he  hated,  he  was  not,  when 
dividing  his  property  as  their  inheritance,  to  make  the  son  of  the 
wife  he  loved  the  first-born,  i.e.  was  not  to  give  him  the  inheritance 
of  the  first-bom,  but  was  to  treat  the  son  of  the  hated  wife,  who  was 
really  the  first-born  son,  as  such,  and  to  give  him  a  double  share  of 
all  his  possession.  "i??j  to  make  or  institute  as  first-born.  '1^1 13  ''.^B'^y, 
over  (by)  the  face  of,  i.e.  opposite  to  the  first-born  son  of  the  hated, 
when  he  was  present ;  in  other  words,  "  during  his  lifetime "  (cf . 
Gen.  xi.  28).  "'''3^,  to  regard  as  that  which  he  is,  the  rightful  first- 
born. The  inheritance  of  the  first-born  consisted  in  "a  mouth  oftwo^^ 
(i.e.  a  mouthful,  portion,  share  of  two)  of  all  that  was  by  him,  all 
that  he  possessed.  Consequently  the  first-born  inherited  twice  as 
much  as  any  of  the  other  sons.  ^^  Beginning  of  his  strength''''  (as  in 
Gen.  xlix.  3).  This  right  of  primogeniture  did  not  originate  with 
Moses,  but  was  simply  secured  by  him  against  arbitrary  invasion. 
It  was  founded,  no  doubt,  upon  hereditary  tradition ;  just  as  we 
find  in  many  other  nations,  that  certain  privileges  are  secured  to  the 
first-born  sons  above  those  born  afterwards. 

Vers.  18-21.  Punishment  of  a  refractory  Son. — The  laws 
upon  this  point  aim  not  only  at  the  defence,  but  also  at  the  limita- 
tion, of  parental  authority.  If  any  one's  son  was  unmanageable  and 
refractory,  not  hearkening  to  the  voice  of  his  parents,  even  when  they 
chastised  him,  his  father  and  mother  were  to  take  him  and  lead  him 
out  to  the  elders  of  the  town  into  the  gate  of  the  place.  The  elders 
are  not  regarded  here  as  judges  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word,  but 
as  magistrates,  who  had  to  uphold  the  parental  authority,  and  ad- 
minister the  local  police.  The  gate  of  the  town  was  the  forum, 
where  the  public  affairs  of  the  place  were  discussed  (cf.  chap.  xxii. 
15,  XXV.  7) ;  as  it  is  in  the  present  day  in  Syria  (Seetzen,  R.  ii.  p. 
88),  and  among  the  Moors  (Hosty  Nachrichten  v.  Marokkos,  p.  239). 
— Yer.  20.  Here  they  were  to  accuse  the  son  as. being  unmanage- 
able, refractory,  disobedient,  as  "  a  glutton  and  a  drunkard."  These 
last  accusations  show  the  reason  for  the  unmanageableness  and  re- 
fractoriness.— Ver.  21.  In  consequence  of  this  accusation,  all  the 


408  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

men  of  the  town  were  to  stone  him,  so  that  he  died.  By  this  the 
riglit  was  taken  away  from  the  parents  of  putting  an  incorrigible 
son  to  death  (cf .  Prov.  xix.  18),  whilst  at  the  same  time  the  parental 
authority  was  fully  preserved.  Nothing  is  said  about  any  evidence 
of  the  charge  brought  by  the  parents,  or  about  any  judicial  inquiry 
generally.  "  In  such  a  case  the  charge  was  a  proof  in  itself.  For 
if  the  heart  of  a  father  and  mother  could  be  brought  to  such  a  point 
as  to  give  up  their  child  to  the  judge  before  the  community  of  the 
nation,  everything  would  have  been  done  that  a  judge  would  need 
to  know  "  (Schnell,  d,  is7\  Recht,  p.  11). — On  ver.  215,  cf.  chap.  xiii. 
6  and  12. 

Vers.  22  and  23.  Burial  of  those  who  had  been  hanged. 
— If  there  was  a  sin  upon  a  man,  n^lp  133K^,  lit,  a  right  of  death, 
i.e,  a  capital  crime  (cf.  chap.  xix.  6  and  xxii.  20^)^  and  he  was  put 
to  death,  and  they  hanged  him  upon  a  tree  (wood),  his  body  was 
not  to  remain  upon  the  wood  over  night,  but  they  were  to  bury  him 
on  the  same  day  upon  which  he  was  hanged ;  "/or  the  hanged  man 
is  a  curse  of  God^^  and  they  were  not  to  defile  the  land  which 
Jehovah  gave  for  an  inheritance.  The  hanging,  not  of  criminals 
who  were  to  be  put  to  death,  but  of  those  who  had  been  executed 
with  the  sword,  was  an  intensification  of  the  punishment  of  death 
(see  at  Num.  xxv.  4),  inasmuch  as  the  body  was  thereby  exposed  to 
peculiar  kinds  of  abominations.  Moses  commanded  the  burial  of 
those  who  had  been  hanged  upon  the  day  of  their  execution, — that  is 
to  say,  as  we  may  see  from  the  application  of  this  law  in  Josh.  viii. 
29,  X.  26,  27,  before  sunset, — because  the  hanged  man,  being  a  curse 
of  God,  defiled  the  land.  The  land  was  defiled  not  only  by  vices 
and  crimes  (cf.  Lev.  xviii.  24,  28;  Num.  xxxv.  34),  but  also  by  the 
exposure  to  view  of  criminals  who  had  been  punished  with  death, 
and  thus  had  been  smitten  by  the  curse  of  God,  inasmuch  as  their 
shameful  deeds  were  thereby  publicly  exposed  to  view.  We  are 
not  to  think  of  any  bodily  defilement  of  the  land  through  the  de- 
composition consequent  upon  death,  as  J.  D.  Mich,  and  Sommer 
suppose ;  so  that  there  is  no  ground  for  speaking  of  any  discre- 
pancy between  this  and  the  old  law. — (On  the  appHcation  of  this 
law  to  Christ,  see  Gal.  iii.  13.) — This  regulation  is  appended  very 
loosely  to  what  precedes.  The  link  of  connection  is  contained  in 
the  thought,  that  with  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  the  recollec 
tion  of  their  crimes  was  also  to  be  removed. 


CHAP.  XXII.  1-12.  409 

The  Duty  to  love  onis  Neighbour ;  and  Warning  against  a  Violation 
of  the  Natural  Order  of  Things,  Instructions  to  sanctify  the 
Marriage  State. — Chap.  xxii. 

Going  deeper  and  deeper  into  the  manifold  relations  of  the 
national  life,  Moses  first  of  all  explains  in  vers.  1-12  the  attitude  of 
an  Israelite,  on  the  one  hand,  towards  a  neighbour ;  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  towards  the  natural  classification  and  arrangement  of 
thincrs,  and  shows  how  love  should  rule  in  the  midst  of  all  these 
relations.  The  different  relations  brought  under  consideration  are 
selected  rather  by  way  of  examples,  and  therefore  follow  one 
another  without  any  link  of  connection,  for  the  purpose  of  ex- 
hibiting the  truth  in  certain  concrete  cases,  and  showing  how  the 
covenant  people  were  to  hold  all  the  arrangements  of  God  sacred, 
whether  in  nature  or  in  social  life. 

Vers.  1-12.  In  vers.  1-4  Moses  shows,  by  a  still  further  expaii- 
sion  of  Ex.  xxiii.  4,  5,  how  the  property  of  a  neighbour  was  to  be 
regarded  and  preserved.  If  any  man  saw  an  ox  or  a  sheep  of  his 
brother's  (fellow-countryman)  going  astray,  he  was  not  to  draw 
back  from  it,  but  to  bring  it  back  to  his  brother ;  and  if  the  owner 
lived  at  a  distance,  or  was  unknown,  he  was  to  take  it  into  his  own 
house  or  farm,  till  he  came  to  seek  it.  He  was  also  to  do  the  same 
with  an  ass  or  any  other  property  that  another  had  lost. — Ver.  4. 
A  fallen  animal  belonging  to  another  he  was  also  to  help  up  (as  in 
Ex.  xxiii.  5  :  except  that  in  this  case,  instead  of  a  brother  generally, 
an  enemy  or  hater  is  mentioned). — Yer.  5.  As  the  property  of  a 
neighbour  was  to  be  sacred  in  the  estimation  of  an  Israelite,  so  also 
the  divine  distinction  of  the  sexes,  which  was  kept  sacred  in  civil  life 
by  the  clothing  peculiar  to  each  sex,  was  to  be  not  less  but  even  more 
sacredly  observed.  "  There  shall  not  he  maris  things  upon  a  looman, 
and  a  man  shall  not  put  on  a  woman* s  clothes."  v3  does  not  signify 
clothing  merely,  nor  arms  only,  but  includes  every  kind  of  domestic 
and  other  utensils  (as  in  Ex.  xxii.  6  ;  Lev.  xi.  32,  xiii.  49).  The 
immediate  design  of  this  prohibition  was  not  to  prevent  licentious- 
ness, or  to  oppose  idolatrous  practices  (the  proofs  which  Spencer  has 
adduced  of  the  existence  of  such  usages  among  heathen  nations  are 
very  far-fetched)  ;  but  to  maintain  the  sanctity  of  that  distinction 
of  the  sexes  which  was  established  by  the  creation  of  man  and 
woman,  and  in  relation  to  w^hich  Israel  was  not  to  sin.  Every  viola- 
tion or  wiping  out  of  this  distinction — such  even,  for  example,  as  the 
emancipation  of  a  woman — was  unnatural,  and  therefore  an  abomi- 


410  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

nation  in  the  sight  of  God. — Vers.  6,  7.  The  affectionate  relation 
of  parents  to  their  young,  which  God  had  estabhshed  even  in  the 
animal  world,  was  also  to  be  kept  just  as  sacred.  If  any  one  found 
a  bird's  nest  by  the  road  upon  a  tree,  or  upon  the  ground,  with 
young  ones  or  eggs,  and  the  mother  sitting  upon  them,  he  was  not 
to  take  the  mother  with  the  young  ones,  but  to  let  the  mother  fly, 
and  only  take  the  young.  Knfpj  for  nnjpjj  as  in  Ex.  v.  3.  The  com- 
mand is  related  to  the  one  in  Lev.  xxii.  28  and  Ex.  xxiii.  19,  and 
is  placed  upon  a  par  with  the  commandment  relating  to  parents,  by 
the  fact  that  obedience  is  urged  upon  the  people  by  the  same  pro- 
mise in  both  instances  {yid.  chap.  v.  16  ;  Ex.  xx.  12). — Yer.  8.  Still 
less  were  they  to  expose  human  life  to  danger  through  carelessness. 
^'  If  thou  build  a  new  house,  make  a  rim  (maakeh) — i.e,  a  balus- 
trade— to  thy  roof,  that  thou  bring  not  blood-guiltiness  upon  thy  house, 
if  any  one  fall  from  it"  The  roofs  of  the  Israelitlsh  houses  were 
flat,  as  they  mostly  are  in  the  East,  so  that  the  inhabitants  often 
lived  upon  them  (Josh.  ii.  6 ;  2  Sam.  xi.  2  ;  Matt.  x.  27). — In  vers. 
9—11,  there  follow  several  prohibitions  against  mixing  together  the 
things  which  are  separated  in  God's  creation,  consisting  partly  of  a 
verbal  repetition  of  Lev.  xix.  19  (see  the  explanation  of  this  pas- 
sage).— To  this  there  is  appended  in  ver.  12  the  law  concerning  the 
tassels  upon  the  hem  of  the  upper  garment  (Num.  xv.  37  sqq.), 
which  were  to  remind  the  Israelites  of  their  calling,  to  walk  before 
the  Lord  in  faithful  fulfilment  of  the  commandments  of  God  (see 
the  commentary  upon  this  passage). 

Vers.  13-29.  Laws  of  Chastity  and  ^Marriage. — Higher 
and  still  holier  than  the  order  of  nature  stands  the  moral  order  of 
marriage,  upon  which  the  well-being  not  only  of  domestic  life,  but 
also  of  the  civil  commonwealth  of  nations,  depends.  Marriage  must 
be  founded  upon  fidelity  and  chastity  on  the  part  of  those  who  are 
married.  To  foster  this,  and  secure  it  against  outbreaks  of  malice 
and  evil  lust,  was  the  design  and  object  of  the  laws  which  follow. 
The  first  (vers.  13-21)  relates  to  the  chastity  of  a  woman  on  enter- 
ing into  the  married  state,  which  might  be  called  in  question  by  her 
husband,  either  from  malice  or  with  justice.  The  former  case  is 
that  which  Moses  treats  of  first  of  all.  If  a  man  took  a  wife,  and 
came  to  her,  and  hated  her,  Le.  turned  against  her  after  gratifying 
his  carnal  desires  (like  Amnon,  for  example,  2  Sam.  xiii.  15),  and 
in  order  to  get  rid  of  her  again,  attributed  "  deeds  or  things  of 
words  "  to  her,  i.e»  things  which  give  occasion  for  words  or  talk,  and 


CHAP.  XXII.  13-29.  411 

SO  brous!;lit  an  evil  name  upon  her,  saying,  that  on  coming  to  her  he 
did  not  find  virginity  in  her.  D^^n^^  virginity,  here  the  signs  of  it, 
viz.,  according  to  ver.  17,  the  marks  of  a  first  intercourse  upon  the 
bed-clothes  or  dress. — Vers.  15  sqq.  In  such  a  case  the  parents  of 
the  young  woman  pV^n  for  nnyan^  as  in  Gen.  xxiv.  14,  28,  accord- 
ing to  the  earliest  usage  of  the  books  of  Moses,  a  virgin,  then  also 
a  yoiuig  woman,  e.g.  Ruth  ii.  6,  iv.  12)  were  to  bring  the  matter 
before  the  elders  of  the  town  into  the  gate  (the  judicial  forum ;  see 
chap.  xxi.  19),  and  establish  the  chastity  and  innocence  of  their 
daughter  by  spreading  the  bed-clothes  before  them.  It  was  not 
necessary  to  this  end  that  the  parents  should  have  taken  possession 
of  the  spotted  bed-clothes  directly  after  the  marriage  night,  as  is 
customarily  done  by  the  Bedouins  and  the  lower  classes  of  the  Mos- 
lem in  Egypt  and  Syria  (cf.  Niebuhr,  Beschr.  v,  Arab.  pp.  35  sqq.; 
ArvieuXy  merkw.  NacJir.  iii.  p.  258  ;  Burckhardty  Beduinen,  p.  214, 
etc.).  It  was  sufficient  that  the  cloth  should  be  kept,  in  case  such  a 
proof  might  be  required. — Vers.  18  sqq.  The  elders,  as  the  magis- 
trates of  the  place,  were  then  to  send  for  the  man  who  had  so 
calumniated  his  young  wife,  and  to  chastise  him  ("ID^,  as  in  chap. 
xxi.  18,  used  to  denote  bodily  chastisement,  though  the  limitation 
of  the  number  of  strokes  to  forty  save  one,  may  have  been  a  later 
institution  of  the  schools)  ;  and  in  addition  to  this  they  were  to  im- 
pose a  fine  upon  him  of  100  shekels  of  silver,  which  he  was  to  pay 
to  the  father  of  the  young  wife  for  his  malicious  calumniation  of  an 
Israelitish  maiden, — twice  as^  much  as  the  seducer  of  a  virgin  was 
to  pay  to  her  father  for  the  reproach  brought  upon  him  by  the 
humihation  of  his  daughter  (ver.  29)  ;  and  lastly,  they  were  to 
deprive  the  man  of  the  right  of  divorce  from  his  wife. — Vers.  20, 
21.  In  the  other  case,  however,  if  the  man's  words  were  tfue,  and 
the  girl  had  not  been  found  to  be  a  virgin,  the  elders  were  to  bring 
her  out  before  the  door  of  her  father's  house,  and  the  men  of  the 
town  were  to  stone  her  to  death,  because  she  had  committed  a  folly 
in  Israel  (cf.  Gen.  xxxiv.  7),  to  commit  fornication  in  her  father's 
house.  The  punishment  of  death  was  to  be  inflicted  upon  her,  not 
so  much  because  she  had  committed  fornication,  as  because  not- 
withstanding this  she  had  allowed  a  man  to  marry  her  as  a  spotless 
virgin,  and  possibly  even  after  her  betrothal  had  gone  with  another 
man  (cf.  vers.  23,  24).  There  is  no  ground  for  thinking  of  unna- 
tural wantonness,  as  Knobel  does. — ^Ver.  22.  If  any  one  lay  with  a 
married  woman,  they  were  both  of  them  to  be  put  to  death  as  adul- 
terers (cf.  Lev.  XX.  10). 


412  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Vers.  23-29.  In  connection  with  the  seduction  of  a  virgin  (^p_, 
puella,  a  marriageable  girl ;  i^^ins,  vii^go  immaculata,  a  virgin),  two, 
or  really  three,  cases  are  distinguished ;  viz.  (1)  whether  she  was 
betrothed  (vers.  23-27),  or  not  betrothed  (vers.  28,  29)  ;  (2)  if  she 
were  betrothed,  whether  it  was  (a)  in  the  town  (vers.  23,  24)  or 
(b)  in  the  open  field  (vers.  25-27)  that  she  had  been  violated  by  a 
man. — ^Vers.  23,  24.  If  a  betrothed  virgin  had  allowed  a  man  to 
have  intercourse  with  her  (i.e.  one  who  was  not  her  bridegroom), 
they  were  both  of  them,  the  man  and  the  girl,  to  be  led  out  to  the 
gate  of  the  town,  and  stoned  that  they  might  die  :  the  girl,  because 
she  had  not  cried  in  the  city,  Le.  had  not  called  for  help,  and  con- 
sequently was  to  be  regarded  as  consenting  to  the  deed  ;  the  man, 
because  he  had  humbled  his  neighbour's  wife.  The  betrothed 
woman  was  placed  in  this  respect  upon  a  par  with  a  married  woman, 
and  in  fact  is  expressly  called  a  wife  in  ver.  24.  Betrothal  was 
the  first  step  towards  mamage,  even  if  it  was  not  a  solemn  act 
attested  by  witnesses.  Written  agreements  of  marriage  were  not 
introduced  till  a  later  period  (Tobit  vii.  14 ;  Tr.  Ketuboth  i.  2). — 
Vers.  25-27.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  a  man  met  a  betrothed  girl  in 
the  field,  and  laid  hold  of  her  and  lay  with  her,  the  man  alone  was 
to  die,  and  nothing  was  to  be  done  to  the  girl.  "  There  is  in  the 
damsel  no  death-sin  (i.e.  no  sin  to  be  punished  with  death)  ;  but  as 
when  a  man  riseth  against  his  neighbour  and  slayeth  him,  even  so  is 
this  matter."  In  the  open  field  the  girl  had  called  for  help,  but  no 
one  had  helped  her.  It  was  therefore  a  forcible  rape. — Vers.  28, 
29.  The  last  case :  if  a  virgin  was  not  betrothed,  and  a  man  seized 
her  and  lay  with  her,  and  they  were  found,  i.e.  discovered  or  con- 
victed of  their  deed,  the  man  was  to  pay  the  father  of  the  girl  fifty 
shekels  of  silver,  for  the  reproach  brought  upon  him  and  his  house, 
and  to  marry  the  girl  whom  he  had  humbled,  without  ever  being 
able  to  divorce  her.  This  case  is  similar  to  the  one  mentioned  in 
Ex.  xxii.  15,  16.  The  omission  to  mention  the  possibility  of  the 
father  refusing  to  give  him  his  daughter  for  a  wife,  makes  no  essen- 
tial difference.  It  is  assumed  as  self-evident  here,  that  such  a  right 
w^as  possessed  by  the  father. 

Ver.  30  (or  chap,  xxiii.  1).  This  verse,  in  which  the  prohibition 
of  incest  is  renewed  by  a  repetition  of  the  first  provision  in  the 
earlier  law  (Lev.  xviii.  7,  8),  is  no  doubt  much  better  adapted  to 
form  the  close  of  the  laws  of  chastity  and  marriage,  than  the  intro- 
duction to  the  laws  which  follow  concerning  the  right  of  citizenship 
in  the  congregation  of  the  Lord. 


I 
I 


CHAP.  XXIII.  1-8.  413 

Regulations  as  to  the  Right  of  Citizenship  in  the  Congregation  of  the 
Lord, — Chap,  xxiii. 

From  the  sanctification  of  the  house  and  the  domestic  relation, 
to  which  the  laws  of  marriage  and  chastity  in  the  previous  chapter 
pointed,  Moses  proceeds  to  instructions  concerning  the  sanctification 
of  their  union  as  a  congregation  :  he  gives  directions  as  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  certain  persons  from  the  congregation  of  the  Lord,  and  the 
reception  of  others  into  it  (vers.  1-8)  ;  as  to  the  preservation  of  the 
purity  of  the  camp  in  time  of  war  (vers.  9-14)  ;  as  to  the  reception 
of  foreign  slaves  into  the  land,  and  the  removal  of  licentious  persons 
out  of  it  (vers.  15-18)  ;  and  lastly,  as  to  certain  duties  of  citizen- 
ship (19-25). 

Vers.  1-8.  The  Eight  of  Citizenship  in  the  Congrega- 
tion OF  the  Lord. — Ver.  1.  Into  the  congregation  of  the  Lord 
there  was  not  to  come,  i.e.  not  to  be  received,  any  person  who  was 
mutilated  in  his  sexual  member.  n3'n"y^VS,  literally  wounded  by 
crushing,  i.e.  mutilated  in  this  way;  Vulg.  eunuchus  attritis  vel 
amputatis  testiculis.  Not  only  animals  (see  at  Lev.  xxii.  24),  but 
men  also,  were  castrated  in  this  way.  •"'?9^  ^^"^3  was  one  whose 
sexual  member  was  cut  off ;  Vulg,  abscisso  veretro.  According  to 
Mishnah  Jeham,  vi.  2,  ^'contusus  ns'i  est  omnis,  cujus  testiculi  vul- 
nerati  sunt,  vel  certe  unus  eorum;  exsectus  (J^l"*?),  cujus  membrum 
virile  prcecisum  est,"  In  the  modem  East,  emasculation  is  generally 
performed  in  this  way  (see  Tournefort,  Reise.  ii.  p.  259,  and  Burck- 
hardt,  Nubien,  pp.  450,  451).  The  reason  for  the  exclusion  of 
emasculated  persons  from  the  congregation  of  Jehovah,  i.e.  not 
merely  from  office  (officio  et  publico  magistratu,  Luth,)  and  from 
marriage  with  an  Israelitish  woman  (Fag.,  C.  a  Lap.,  and  others), 
but  from  admission  into  the  covenant  fellowship  of  Israel  with  the 
Lord,  is  to  be  found  in  the  mutilation  of  the  nature  of  man  as 
created  by  God,  which  was  irreconcilable  with  the  character  of  the 
people  of  God.  Nature  is  not  destroyed  by  grace,  but  sanctified 
and  transformed.  This  law,  however,  was  one  of  the  ordinances 
intended  for  the  period  of  infancy,  and  has  lost  its  significance  with 
the  spread  of  the  kingdom  of  God  over  all  the  nations  of  the  earth 
(Isa.  Ivi.  4). — Ver.  2.  So  also  with  the  ">T»D,  i.e.  not  persons  begot- 
ten out  of  wedlock,  illegitimate  children  generally  (LXX.,  Vulg.), 
but,  according  to  the  Talmud  and  the  Rabbins,  those  who  were 
begotten  in  incest  or  adultery  (cf.  Ges.  thes.  p.  781).   The  etymology 


414  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

of  the  word  is  obscure.  The  only  other  place  in  which  it  occurs  is 
Zech.  ix.  6 ;  and  it  is  neither  contracted  from  D^^  and  "^t  (according 
to  the  Talmud,  and  Hitzig  on  Zech.  ix.  6),  nor  from  "IT  DVp  (^Geiger 
Urschr,  p.  52),  but  in  all  probability  is  to  be  derived  from  a  root  "ITD, 
synonymous  with  the  Arabic  word  "  to  be  corrupt,  or  foul."  The 
additional  clause,  "  not  even  in  the  tenth  generations^  precludes  all 
possibility  of  their  ever  being  received.  Ten  is  the  number  of  com- 
plete exclusion.  In  ver.  3,  therefore,  ''for  ever^  is  added.  The 
reason  is  the  same  as  in  the  case  of  mutilated  persons,  namely,  their 
springing  from  a  connection  opposed  to  the  divine  order  of  the  crea- 
tion.— Vers.  3-6.  Also  no  Ammonite  or  Moabite  was  to  be  received, 
not  even  in  the  tenth  generation ;  not,  however,  because  their  fore- 
fathers were  begotten  in  incest  (Gen.  xix.  30  sqq.),  as  Knohel  sup- 
poses, but  on  account  of  the  hostility  they  had  manifested  to  the 
establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Not  only  had  they  failed  to 
give  Israel  a  hospitable  reception  on  its  journey  (see  at  chap.  ii.  29), 
but  they  (viz.  the  king  of  the  Moabites)  had  even  hired  Balaam  to 
curse  Israel.  In  this  way  they  had  brought  upon  themselves  the 
curse  which  falls  upon  all  those  who  curse  Israel,  according  to  the 
infallible  word  of  God  (Gen.  xii.  3),  the  truth  of  which  even 
Balaam  was  obliged  to  attest  in  the  presence  of  Balak  (Num.  xxiv. 
9)  ;  although  out  of  love  to  Israel  the  Lord  turned  the  curse  of 
Balaam  into  a  blessing  (cf.  Num.  xxii.-xxiv.).  For  this  reason 
Israel  was  never  to  seek  their  welfare  and  prosperity,  Le.  to  make 
this  an  object  of  its  care  ("  to  seek,"  as  in  Jer.  xxix.  7)  ;  not  indeed 
from  personal  hatred,  for  the  purpose  of  repaying  evil  with  evil, 
since  this  neither  induced  Moses  to  publish  the  prohibition,  nor  in- 
stigated Ezra  when  he  put  the  law  in  force,  by  compelling  the  sepa- 
ration of  all  Ammonitish,  Moabitish,  and  Canaanitish  wives  from 
the  newly  estabhshed  congregation  in  Jerusalem  (Ezra  ix.  12).  How 
far  Moses  was  from  being  influenced  by  such  motives  of  personal 
or  national  revenge  is  evident,  apart  from  the  prohibition  in  chap, 
ii.  9  and  19  against  making  war  upon  the  Moabites  and  Am- 
monites, from  the  command  which  follows  in  vers.  8  and  9  with 
reference  to  the  Edomites  and  Egyptians.  These  nations  had  also 
manifested  hostility  to  the  Israelites.  Edom  had  come  against  them 
when  they  desired  to  march  peaceably  through  his  land  (Num.  xx. 
18  sqq.),  and  the  Pharaohs  of  Egypt  had  heavily  oppressed  them. 
Nevertheless,  Israel  was  to  keep  the  bond  of  kindred  sacred  ("  he 
is  thy  brother"),  and  not  to  forget  in  the  case  of  the  Egyptians  the 
benefits  derived  from  their  sojourn  in  their  land.     Their  childrea 


i 


CHAP.  XXIII.  9-18.  415 

might  come  into  the  congregation  of  the  Lord  in  the  third  gene- 
ration, i.e.  the  great-grandchildren  of  Edomites  or  Egyptians,  wha 
liad  lived  as  strangers  in  Israel  (see  at  Ex.  xx.  5).  Such  persons 
might  be  incorporated  into  the  covenant  nation  by  circumcision. 

Vers.  9-14.  Preservation  of  the  Purity  of  the  Camp  in 
Time  of  War. — The  bodily  appearance  of  the  people  was  also  to 
correspond  to  the  sacredness  of  Israel  as  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord,  especially  when  they  gathered  in  hosts  around  their  God. 
*•'  When  thou  marchest  out  as  a  camp  against  thine  enemies,  beware  of 
every  evil  thing, ^^  What  is  meant  by  an  "  evil  thing  "  is  stated  in 
vers.  10-13,  viz.  un cleanness,  and  uncleanliness  of  the  body. — Vers. 
10,  11.  The  person  who  had  become  unclean  through  a  nightly 
occurrence,  was  to  go  out  of  the  camp  and  remain  there  till  he  had 
cleansed  himself  in  the  evening.  On  the  journey  through  the 
desert,  none  but  those  who  were  affected  with  uncleanness  of  a  longer 
duration  were  to  be  removed  from  the  camp  (Num.  v.  2);  but  when 
they  were  encamped,  this  law  was  to  apply  to  even  lighter  defile- 
ments.— Vers.  12,  13.  The  camp  of  war  was  also  not  to  be  defiled 
with  the  dirt  of  excrements.  Outside  the  camp  there  was  to  be  a 
space  or  place  (1^,  as  in  Num.  ii.  17)  for  the  necessities  of  nature, 
and  among  their  implements  they  were  to  have  a  spade,  with  which 
they  were  to  dig  when  they  sate  down,  and  then  cover  it  up  again. 
"iri^,  generally  a  plug,  here  a  tool  for  sticking  in,  i.e.  for  digging  into 
the  ground. — Ver.  14.  For  the  camp  was  to  be  (to  be  kept)  holy, 
because  Jehovah  walked  in  the  midst  of  it,  in  order  that  He  might 
not  see  "  nakedness  of  a  thing,^  i.e.  anything  to  be  ashamed  of  (see 
at  chap.  xxiv.  1)  in  the  people,  "  and  turn  away  from  theeJ^  There 
was  nothing  shameful  in  the  excrement  itself;  but  the  want  of 
reverence,  which  the  people  would  display  through  not  removing 
it,  would  offend  the  Lord  and  drive  Him  out  of  the  camp  of  Israel. 

Vers.  15-18.  Toleration  and  Non-toleration  in  the 
Congregation  of  the  Lord. — Vers.  15,  16.  A  slave  who  had 
escaped  from  his  master  to  Israel  was  not  to  be  given  up,  but  to  be 
allowed  to  dwell  in  the  land,  wherever  he  might  choose,  and  not  to 
be  oppressed.  The  reference  is  to  a  slave  who  had  fled  to  them 
from  a  foreign  country,  on  account  of  the  harsh  treatment  which 
he  had  received  from  his  heathen  master.  The  plural  ^^p^  de- 
notes the  rule. — Vers.  17,  18.  On  the  other  hand,  male  and  female 
prostitutes  of  Israelitish  descent  were  not  to  be  tolerated ;  i.e.  it  was 


4:16  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


4 


not  to  be  allowed,  that  either  a  male  or  female  among  the  Israelites 
should  give  himself  up  to  prostitution  as  an  act  of  religious  worship. 
The  exclusion  of  foreign  prostitutes  was  involved  in  the  command 
to  root  out  the  Canaanites.     tJHiJ  and  '"^^i?  were  persons  who  pro- 
stituted themselves  in  the  worship  of  the  Canaanitish  Astarte  (see 
at  Gen.  xxxviii.  21). — "  The  wages  of  a  prostitute  and  the  money  oj      *. 
dogs  shall  not  come  into  the  house  of  the  Lord'  on  account  of  (7,  for  al 
the  more  remote  cause,  Ewald,  §  217)  any  vow ;  for  even  both  these 
(viz.  even  the  prostitute  and  dog,  not  merely  their  dishonourable 
gains)  are  abomination  unto  the  Lord  thy  GodV     "  The  hire  of  a 
whore"  is  what  the  hedeshah  was  paid  for  giving  herself  up.     "  The 
price  of  a  dog  "  is  not  the  price  paid  for  the  sale  of  a  dog  (Bochart,     _ 
Spencer,  Iken,  Baumgarten,  etc.),  but  is  a  figurative  expression  used  1 1 
to  denote  the  gains  of  the  kadesh,  who  was  called  KLvatBo<;  by  the       ■ 
Greeks,  and  received  his  name  from  the  dog-like  manner  in  which 
the   male   kadesh   debased  himself  (see  Rev.  xxii.  15,  where  the 
unclean  are  distinctly  called  "dogs"). 


il 


Vers.  19-25.  Different  Theocratic  Rights  of  Citizen- 
ship. —  Vers.  19,  20.  Of  his  brother  (i.e.  his  countryman),  the 
Israelite  was  not  to  take  interest  for  money,  food,  or  anything  else 
that  he  lent  to  him  ;  but  only  of  strangers  (non-Israelites  :  cf .  Ex. 
xxii.  24  and  Lev.  xxv.  36,  37). — ^Vers.  21-23.  Vows  vowed  to  the 
Lord  were  to  be  fulfilled  without  delay ;  but  omitting  to  vow  was 
not  a  sin.  (On  vows  themselves,  see  at  Lev.  xxvii.  and  Num.  xxx. 
2  sqq.)  nilJ  is  an  accusative  defining  the  meaning  more  fully  :  in 
free  will,  spontaneously. — ^Vers.  24,  25.  In  the  vineyard  and  corn- 
field of  a  neighbour  they  might  eat  at  pleasure  to  still  their  hunger, 
but  they  were  not  to  put  anything  into  a  vessel,  or  swing  a  sickle 
upon  another's  corn,  that  is  to  say,  carry  away  any  store  of  grapes 
or  ears  of  corn,  "^'^^^s,  according  to  thy  desire,  or  appetite  (cf. 
chap.  xiv.  26).  ^^ Pluck  the  ears:^^  cf.  Matt.  xii.  1 ;  Luke  vi.  1. — 
The  right  of  hungry  persons,  when  passing  through  a  field,  to  pluck 
ears  of  corn,  and  rub  out  the  grains  and  eat,  is  still  recognised 
among  the  Arabs  (vid.  Rob,  PaL  ii.  192). 

On  Divorce.     Warnings  against  want  of  Affection  or  Injustice* — 

Chap.  xxiv. 

Vers.  1-5  contain  two  laws  concerning  the  relation  of  a  man  to 
his  wife.  The  first  (vers.  1-4)  has  reference  to  divorce.  In  these 
verses,  however,  divorce  is  not  established  as  a  right ;  all  that  is 


CHAP.  XXIV.  1-5.  417 

^one  is,  that  in  case  of  a  divorce  a  reunion  with  the  divorced  wife 
is  forbidden,  if  in  the  meantime  she  had  married  another  man, 
even  though  the  second  husband  had  also  put  her  away,  or  had 
died.  The  four  verses  form  a  period,  in  which  vers.  1-3  are  the 
clauses  of  the  protasis,  which  describe  the  matter  treated  about; 
and  ver.  4  contains  the  apodosis,  with  the  law  concerning  the  point 
in  question.  If  a  man  married  a  wife,  and  he  put  her  away  with  a 
letter  of  divorce,  because  she  did  not  please  him  any  longer,  and 
the  divorced  woman  married  another  man,  and  he  either  put  her 
away  in  the  same  manner  or  died,  the  first  husband  could  not  take 
her  as  his  wife  again.  The  putting  away  (divorce)  of  a  wife  with 
a  letter  of  divorce,  which  the  husband  gave  to  the  wife  whom  he 
put  away,  is  assumed  as  a  custom  founded  upon  tradition.  This 
tradition  left  the  question  of  divorce  entirely  at  the  will  of  the 
husband  :  "  if  the  wife  does  not  find  favour  in  his  eyes  (i.e.  does  not 
please  him),  because  he  has  found  in  her  something  shamefuV^  (chap, 
xxiii.  15).  nnVj  nakedness,  shame,  disgrace  (Isa.  xx.  4;  1  Sam. 
XX.  30)  ;  in  connection  with  "i^*^,  the  shame  of  a  thing,  i.e.  a  shame- 
ful thing  (LXX.  aayrjiiov  Trpdyfia ;  Vulg.  aliquam  foetiditatem). 
The  meaning  of  this  expression  as  a  ground  of  divorce  was  dis- 
puted even  among  the  Rabbins.  HilleVs  school  interpret  it  in  the 
widest  and  most  lax  manner  possible,  according  to  the  explanation 
of  the  Pharisees  in  Matt.  xix.  3,  "for  every  cause."  They  no 
doubt  followed  the  rendering  of  OnJcelos,  DJns  HTay,  the  transgres- 
sion of  a  thing ;  but  this  is  contrary  to  the  use  of  the  word  nny^  to 
which  the  interpretation  given  by  Shammai  adhered  more  strictly. 
His  explanation  of  "ij*n  nny  is  "rem  impudicam,  libidinem,  lasciviam, 
impudicitiam."  Adultery,  to  which  some  of  the  Eabbins  would 
restrict  the  expression,  is  certainly  not  to  be  thought  of,  because 
this  was  to  be  punished  with  death.^  ^('''I^  "IDD,  fic^Xiov  anro- 
<na(TLov,  a  letter  of  divorce ;  rin''13,  hewing  off,  cutting  off,  sc.  from 
the  man,  with  whom  the  wife  was  to  be  one  flesh  (Gen.  ii.  24). 
The  custom  of  giving  letters  of  divorce  was  probably  adopted  by 
the  Israelites  in  Egypt,  where  the  practice  of  writing  had  already 
found  its  way  into  all  the  relations  of  life.^  The  law  that  the  first 
husband  could  not  take  his  divorced  wife  back  again,  if  she  had 

1  For  the  different  views  of  the  Rabbins  upon  this  subject,  see  Mishnah 
tract.  Gitlinix.  10;  Buxtorf,  de  sponsal  et  divort.  pp.  88  sqq.;  Selden^  uxor  ebr. 
1.  iii.  c.  18  and  20  ;  and  Lightfoot^  Jiorai  ebr.  et  talm.  ad  Matth.  v.  31  sq. 

2  The  rabbinical  rules  on  the  grounds  of  divorce  and  the  letter  of  divorce, 
according  to  Maimonides^  have  been  collected  by  i>urenhusius,  ad  Mishn.  tr. 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  2  D 


418  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

married  another  husband  in  the  meantime,  even  supposing  that  the 
second  husband  was  dead,  would  necessarily  put  a  check  upon 
frivolous  divorces.  Moses  could  not  entirely  abolish  the  traditional 
custom,  if  only  "because  of  the  hardness  of  the  people's  hearts "■■ 
(Matt.  xix.  8).  The  thought,  therefore,  of  the  impossibility  of  " 
reunion  with  the  first  husband,  after  the  wife  had  contracted  a 
second  marriage,  would  put  some  restraint  upon  a  frivolous  rupture  MM 
of  the  marriage  tie  :  it  would  have  this  effect,  that  whilst,  on  the 
one  hand,  the  man  would  reflect  when  inducements  to  divorce  his 
wife  presented  themselves,  and  would  recall  a  rash  act  if  it  had 
been  performed,  before  the  wife  he  had  put  away  had  married 
another  husband ;  on  the  other  hand,  the  wife  would  yield  more 
readily  to  the  will  of  her  husband,  and  seek  to  avoid  furnishing 
him  with  an  inducement  for  divorce.  But  this  effect  would  be  still 
more  readily  produced  by  the  reason  assigned  by  Moses,  namely, 
that  the  divorced  woman  was  defiled  (nt^D^n,  Hothpael,  as  in  Num. 
i.  47)  by  her  marriage  with  a  second  husband.  The  second 
marriage  of  a  woman  who  had  been  divorced  is  designated  by 
Moses  a  defilement  of  the  woman,  primarily  no  doubt  with  refer- 
ence to  the  fact  that  the  emissio  seminis  in  sexual  intercourse 
rendered  unclean,  though  not  merely  in  the  sense  of  such  a  defile- 
ment as  was  removed  in  the  evening  by  simple  washing,  but  as  a 
moral  defilement,  i.e.  blemishing,  desecration  of  the  sexual  com- 
munion which  was  sanctified  by  marriage,  in  the  same  sense  in 
which  adultery  is  called  a  defilement  in  Lev.  xviii.  20  and  Num. 
v.  13,  14.  Thus  the  second  marriage  of  a  divorced  woman  was 
placed  implicite  upon  a  par  with  adultery,  and  some  approach 
made  towards  the  teaching  of  Christ  concerning  marriage :  "  Who- 
soever shall  marry  her  that  is  divorced,  committeth  adultery"  (Matt. 
V.  32). — But  if  the  second  marriage  of  a  divorced  woman  was  a 
moral  defilement,  of  course  the  wife  could  not  marry  the  first  again 
even  after  the  death  of  her  second  husband,  not  only  because  such 
a  reunion  would  lower  the  dignity  of  the  woman,  and  the  woman 
would  appear  too  much  like  property,  which  could  be  disposed  of 
at  one  time  and  reclaimed  at  another  (ScJiuUz),  but  because  the 
defilement  of  the  wife  would  be  thereby  repeated,  and  even  in- 
creased, as  the  moral  defilement  which  the  divorced  wife  acquired 
through  the  second  marriage  was  not  removed  by  a  divorce  from 
the  second  husband,  nor  yet  by  his  death.     Such  defilement  was 

Gittln,  c.  1  (T.  iii.  pp.  322  sq.  of  the  MisJinaJi  of  Sur.),  where  diiferent  specimens 
of  letters  of  divorce  are  given  ;  the  latter  also  in  LiglitfooU  I.e. 


CHAP.  XXIV.  6-9.  419 

an  abomination  before  Jehovah,  by  which  they  would  cause  the 
land  to  sin,  i.e.  stain  it  with  sin,  as  much  as  by  the  sins  of  incest 
and  unnatural  licentiousness  (Lev.  xviii.  25). 

Attached  to  this  law,  which  is  intended  to  prevent  a  frivolous 
severance  of  the  marriage  tie,  there  is  another  in  ver.  5,  which  was 
of  a  more  positive  character,  and  adapted  to  fortify  the  marriage 
bond.  The  newly  married  man  was  not  required  to  perform 
military  service  for  a  whole  year ;  "  and  there  shall  not  come  (any- 
thing) upon  him  with  regard  to  any  matter^  The  meaning  of  this 
last  clause  is  to  be  found  in  what  follows  :  ^^  Free  shall  he  he  for 
his  house  for  a  year"  i.e.  they  shall  put  no  public  burdens  upon 
him,  that  he  may  devote  himself  entirely  to  his  newly  established 
domestic  relations,  and  be  able  to  gladden  his  wife  (compare  chap. 
XX.  7). 

Vers.  6-9.  Various  Prohibitions. — Ver.  6.  "  No  man  shall  take 
in  pledge  the  handmill  and  millstone,  for  he  (who  does  this)  is 
pawning  life."  D^IT),  the  handmill;  H^n,  lit.  the  runner,  i.e.  the 
upper  millstone.  Neither  the  whole  mill  nor  the  upper  millstone 
was  to  be  asked  for  as  a  pledge,  by  which  the  mill  would  be 
rendered  useless,  since  the  handmill  was  indispensable  for  prepar- 
ing the  daily  food  for  the  house ;  so  that  whoever  took  them  away 
injured  life  itself,  by  withdrawing  what  was  indispensable  to  the 
preservation  of  life.  The  mill  is  mentioned  as  one  specimen  of 
articles  of  this  kind,  like  the  clothing  in  Ex.  xxii.  25,  26,  which 
served  the  poor  man  as  bed-clothes  also.  Breaches  of  this  com- 
mandment are  reproved  in  Amos  ii.  8  ;  Job  xxii.  6  ;  Prov.  xx.  16, 
xxii.  27,  xxvii.  13. — Ver.  7.  Repetition  of  the  law  against  man- 
stealing  (Ex.  xxi.  16). — Vers.  8,  9.  The  command,  "  Take  heed  by 
the  plague  of  leprosy  to  observe  diligently  and  to  do  according  to  all 
that  the  priests  teach  thee"  etc.,  does  not  mean,  that  when  they  saw  ' 
signs  of  leprosy  they  were  to  be  upon  their  guard,  to  observe  every- 
thing that  the  priests  directed  them,  as  Knobel  and  many  others 
suppose.  For,  in  the  first  place,  the  reference  to  the  punishment 
of  Miriam  with  leprosy  is  by  no  means  appropriate  to  such  a 
thought  as  this,  since  Miriam  did  not  act  in  opposition  to  the 
priests  after  she  had  been  smitten  with  leprosy,  but  brought  leprosy 
upon  herself  as  a  punishment,  by  her  rebellion  against  Moses 
(Num.  xii.  10  sqq.).  And  in  the  second  place,  this  view  cannot 
be  reconciled  with  V^}^  ""??^'?,  since  "^^^i?  with  3,  either  to  be  upon 
one's  guard  against  (before)  anything  (2  Sam.  xx.  10),  or  when 
takon  in  connection  with  ti'S:3,  to  beware  by  the  soul,  i.e.  for  tlie 


420  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


sake  of  the  worth  of  the  soul  (Jer.  xvii.  21).  The  thought  here, 
therefore,  is,  "  Be  on  thy  guard  because  of  the  plague  of  leprosy," 
i.e.  that  thou  dost  not  get  it,  have  to  bear  it,  as  the  reward  for  thy 
rebeUion  against  what  the  priests  teach  according  to  the  command- 
ment of  the  Lord.  "  Watch  diligently,  that  thou  do  not  incur  the 
plague  of  leprosy"  (Vulgate)  ;  or,  "  that  thou  do  not  sin,  so  as  to  be  j 
punished  with  leprosy"  {J.  H.  Michaelis).  fll 

Vers.  10-15.  Warning  against  oppressing  the  Poor. — Vers.  10,  ' 
11.  If  a  loan  of  any  kind  was  lent  to  a  neighbour,  the  lender  was 
not  to  go  into  his  house  to  pledge  (take)  a  pledge,  but  was  to  let  the 
borrower  bring  the  pledge  out.  The  meaning  is,  that  they  were  to 
leave  it  to  the  borrower  to  give  a  pledge,  and  not  compel  him  to 
give  up  something  as  a  pledge  that  might  be  indispensable  to  him. 
— Vers.  12,  13.  And  if  the  man  was  in  distress  (""^V),  the  lender  was 
not  to  lie  (sleep)  upon  his  pledge,  since  the  poor  man  had  very  often 
nothing  but  his  upper  garment,  in  which  he  slept,  to  give  as  a  pledge. 
This  was  to  be  returned  to  him  in  the  evening.  (A  repetition  of 
Ex.  xxii.  25,  2Q.)  On  the  expression,  "  it  shall  be  righteousness 
unto  thee,"  see  chap.  vi.  25. — Vers.  14,  15.  They  were  not  to 
oppress  a  poor  and  distressed  labourer,  by  withholding  his  wages.  ■I 
This  command  is  repeated  here  from  Lev.  xix.  13,  with  special 
reference  to  the  distress  of  the  poor  man.  "  And  to  it  (his  wages) 
he  lifts  up  his  soul:"  i.e.  he  feels  a  longing  for  it.  "  Lifts  up  his 
soul :"  as  in  Ps.  xxiv.  4 ;  Hos.  iv.  8  ;  Jer.  xxii.  27.  On  ver.  15^, 
see  chap.  xv.  9  and  Jas.  v.  4. 

Vers.  16-18.  Warning  against  Injustice. — ^Ver.  16.  Fathers  were 
not  to  be  put  to  death  upon  (along  with)  their  sons,  nor  sons  upon 
(along  with)  their  fathers,  i.e.  they  were  not  to  suffer  the  punishment 
of  death  with  them  for  crimes  in  which  they  had  no  share ;  but  every 
one  was  to  be  punished  simply  for  his  own  sin.  This  command  was 
important,  to  prevent  an  unwarrantable  and  abusive  application  of 
the  law  which  is  manifest  in  the  movements  of  divine  justice  to 
the  criminal  jurisprudence  of  the  land  (Ex.  xx.  5),  since  it  was  a 
common  thing  among  heathen  nations — e.g.  the  Persians,  Mace- 
donians, and  others — for  the  children  and  families  of  criminals  to  be 
also  put  to  death  (cf.  Esther  ix.  13,  14 ;  Herod,  iii.  19 ;  Ammian 
Marcell.  xxiii.  6 ;  Curtius,  vi.  11,  20,  etc.).  An  example  of  the 
carrying  out  of  this  law  is  to  be  found  in  2  Kings  xiv.  6,  2  Chron. 
XXV.  4.  In  vers.  17,  18,  the  law  against  perverting  the  right  of 
strangers,  orphans,  and  widows,  is  repeated  from  Ex.  xxii.  20,  21, 
and  xxiii.  9  ;  and  an  addition  is  made,  namely,  that  they  were  not 


I 


CHAP.  XXV.  1-3.  421 

to  take  a  widow's  raiment  in  pledge  (cf.  Lev.  xix.  33,  34). — Vers. 
19-22.  Directions  to  allow  strangers,  widows,  and  orphans  to  glean 
in  time  of  harvest  (as  in  Lev.  xix.  9, 10,  andxxiii.  22).  The  reason 
is  given  in  ver.  22,  viz.  the  same  as  in  ver.  18  and  chap.  xv.  15. 

Laws  relating  to  Corporal  Punishment ;  Levirate  Marriages ;  and 
Just  Weights  and  Measures. — Chap.  xxv. 

Vers.  1-3.  Corpokal  Punishment. — The  rule  respecting  the 
corporal  punishment  to  be  inflicted  upon  a  guilty  man  is  introduced 
in  ver.  1  with  the  general  law,  that  in  a  dispute  between  two  men 
the  court  was  to  give  right  to  the  man  who  was  right,  and  to  pro- 
nounce the  guilty  man  guilty  (cf.  Ex.  xxii.  8  and  xxiii.  7). — Yer.  2.  If 
the  guilty  man  was  sentenced  to  stripes,  he  was  to  receive  his  punish- 
ment in  the  presence  of  the  judge,  and  not  more  than  forty  stripes, 
that  he  might  not  become  contemptible  in  the  eyes  of  the  people. 
ni2ri  |3j  son  of  stripes,  i.e.  a  man  liable  to  stripes,  like  son  (child) 
of  death,  in  1  Sam.  xx.  31.  "  According  to  the  need  of  his  crime  in 
number ^^  i.e.  as  many  stripes  as  his  crime  deserved. — Ver.  3.  "  Forty 
shall  ye  heat  him,  and  not  add^^  i.e.  at  most  forty  stripes,  and  not 
more.  The  strokes  were  administered  with  a  stick  upon  the  back 
(Prov.  X.  13,  xix.  29,  xxvi.  3,  etc.).  This  was  the  Egyptian  mode 
of  whipping,  as  we  may  see  depicted  upon  the  monuments,  when  the 
culprits  lie  flat  upon  the  ground,  and  being  held  fast  by  the  hands 
and  feet,  receive  their  strokes  in  the  presence  of  the  judge  (yid. 
Wilkinson^  ii.  p.  11,  and  Rosellini,  ii.  3,  p.  274,  78).  The  number 
forty  was  not  to  be  exceeded,  because  a  larger  number  of  strokes 
with  a  stick  would  not  only  endanger  health  and  life,  but  disgrace 
the  man :  "  that  thy  brother  do  not  become  contemptible  in  thine  eyesP 
If  he  had  deserved  a  severer  punishment,  he  was  to  be  executed. 
In  Turkey  the  punishments  inflicted  are  much  more  severe,  viz. 
from  fifty  to  a  hundred  lashes  with  a  whip ;  and  they  are  at  the 
same  time  inhuman  (see  v.  Tornaiiw,  Moslem.  Becht,  p.  234).  The 
number,  forty,  was  probably  chosen  with  reference  to  its  symbolical 
significance,  which  it  had  derived  from  Gen.  vii.  12  onwards,  as  the 
full  measure  of  judgment.  The  Rabbins  fixed  the  number  at  forty 
save  one  (yid.  2  Cor.  xi.  24),  from  a  scrupulous  fear  of  transgressing 
the  letter  of  the  law,  in  case  a  mistake  should  be  made  in  the 
counting ;  yet  they  felt  no  conscientious  scruples  about  using  a  whip 
of  twisted  thongs  instead  of  a  stick  (vid.  tract.  Mace.  iii.  12  ;  Buxtorf, 
Synag.  Jud.  pp.  522-3 ;  and  Lundius,  Jud.  Heiligth.  p.  472). — Ver.  4. 
The  command  not  to  put  a  muzzle  upon  the  ox  when  threshing,  is 


422  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

no  doubt  proverbial  in  its  nature,  and  even  in  the  context  before  us 
is  not  intended  to  apply  merely  literally  to  an  ox  employed  in  tliresh- 
nig,  but  to  be  understood  in  the  general  sense  in  which  the  Apostle 
Paul  uses  it  in  1  Cor.  ix.  9  and  1  Tim.  v.  18,  viz.  that  a  labourer 
was  not  to  be  deprived  of  his  wages.  As  the  mode  of  thresliing 
presupposed  here — namely,  with  oxen  yoked  together,  and  driven 
to  and  fro  over  the  corn  that  had  been  strewn  upon  the  floor,  that 
they  might  kick  out  the  grains  with  their  hoofs — has  been  retained 
to  the  present  day  in  the  East,  so  has  also  the  custom  of  leaving 
the  animals  employed  in  threshing  without  a  muzzle  (vid,  Hoest, 
Marokos,  p.  129;  WellsL  Arabien,  i.  p.  194;  Robinson,  Pal.  ii. 
pp.  206-7,  iii.  p.  6),  although  the  Mosaic  injunctions  are  not  so 
strictly  observed  by  the  Christians  as  by  the  Mohammedans  (Robin- 
son, ii.  p.  207).  gil 

Vers.  5-10.  On  Levirate  Marriages. — Vers.  5,  6.  If 
brothers  lived  together,  and  one  of  them  died  childless,  the  wife 
of  the  deceased  was  not  to  be  married  outside  {i.e,  away  from  the 
family)  to  a  strange  man  (one  not  belonging  to  her  kindred)  ;  her 
brother-in-law  was  to  come  to  her  and  take  her  for  his  wife,  and 
perform  the  duty  of  a  brother-in-law  to  her.  t33^,  denom.  from 
Dl),  a  brother-in-law,  husband's  brother,  lit,  to  act  the  brother-in- 
law,  i.e.  perform  the  duty  of  a  brother-in-law,  which  consisted  in 
his  marrying  his  deceased  brother's  widow,  and  begetting  a  son  or 
children  with  her,  the  first-bom  of  whom  was  "  to  stand  upon  the 
name  of  his  deceased  brother,"  i.e.  be  placed  in  the  family  of  the 
deceased,  and  be  recognised  as  the  heir  of  his  property,  that  his 
name  (the  name  of  the  man  who  had  died  childless)  might  not  be 
wiped  out  or  vanish  out  of  Israel.  The  provision,  "  without  having 
a  son"  (ben),  has  been  correctly  interpreted  by  the  LXX.,  Vulg., 
Josephus  (Ant.  iv.  8,  23),  and  the  Rabbins,  as  signifying  childless 
(having  no  seed.  Matt.  xxii.  2o)  ;  for  if  the  deceased  had  simply  a 
daughter,  according  to  Num.  xxvii.  4  sqq.,  the  perpetuation  of  his 
house  and  name  was  to  be  ensured  through  her.  The  obligation 
of  a  brother-in-law's  marriage  only  existed  in  cases  where  the 
brothers  had  lived  together,  i.e.  in  one  and  the  same  place,  not 
necessarily  in  one  house  or  with  a  common  domestic  establishment 
and  home  (yid.  Gen.  xiii.  6,  xxxvi.  7). — This  custom  of  a  brother- 
in-law's  (Levirate)  marriage,  which  is  met  with  in  different  nations, 
and  was  an  old  traditional  custom  among  the  Israelites  (see  at  Gen. 
xxxviii.  8  sqq.),  had  its  natural  roots  in  the  desire  inherent  in  man. 


CHAP.  XXV.  5-10.  4-23 

who  is  formed  for  immortality,  and  connected  with  the  hitherto 
undeveloped  belief  in  an  eternal  life,  to  secure  a  continued  personal 
existence  for  himself  and  immortality  for  his  name,  through  the 
perpetuation  of  his  family  and  in  the  life  of  the  son  who  took  his 
place.  This  desire  was  not  suppressed  in  Israel  by  divine  revela- 
tion, but  rather  increased,  inasmuch  as  the  promises  given  to  the 
patriarchs  were  bound  up  with  the  preservation  and  propagation  of 
their  seed  and  name.  The  promise  given  to  Abraham  for  his  seed 
would  of  necessity  not  only  raise  the  begetting  of  children  in  the 
religious  views  of  the  Israelites  into  a  work  desired  by  God  and 
well-pleasing  to  Him,  but  would  also  give  this  significance  to  the 
traditional  custom  of  preserving  the  name  and  family  by  the  sub- 
stitution of  a  marriage  of  duty,  that  they  would  thereby  secure  to 
themselves  and  their  family  a  share  in  the  blessing  of  promise. 
Moses  therefore  recognised  this  custom  as  perfectly  justifiable ;  but 
he  sought  to  restrain  it  within  such  limits,  that  it  should  not  pre- 
sent any  impediment  to  the  sanctification  of  marriage  aimed  at  by 
the  law.  He  took  away  the  compulsory  character,  which  it  hitherto 
possessed,  by  prescribing  in  vers.  7  sqq.,  that  if  the  surviving  brother 
refused  to  marry  his  widowed  sister-in-law,  she  was  to  bring  the 
matter  into  the  gate  before  the  elders  of  the  town  (vid.  chap.  xxi. 
19),  i.e.  before  the  magistrates ;  and  if  the  brother-in-law  still  per- 
sisted in  his  refusal,  she  was  to  take  his  shoe  from  off  his  foot  and 
spit  in  his  face,  with  these  words :  "  So  let  it  be  done  to  the  man  who 
does  not  build  up  his  brothers  house. ^^  The  taking  off  of  the  shoe 
was  an  ancient  custom  in  Israel,  adopted,  according  to  Kuth  iv.  7, 
in  cases  of  redemption  and  exchange,  for  the  purpose  of  confirm- 
ing commercial  transactions.  The  usage  arose  from  the  fact,  that 
when  any  one  took  possession  of  landed  property  he  did  so  by 
treading  upon  the  soil,  and  asserting  his  right  of  possession  by 
standing  upon  it  in  his  shoes.  In  this  way  the  taking  off  of  the 
shoe  and  handing  it  to  another  became  a  symbol  of  the  renuncia- 
tion of  a  man's  position  and  property, — a  symbol  which  was  also 
common  among  the  Indians  and  the  ancient  Germans  (see  my 
Archdologie,  ii.  p.  Q6).  But  the  custom  was  an  ignominious  one 
in  such  a  case  as  this,  when  the  shoe  was  publicly  taken  off  the 
foot  of  the  brother-in-law  by  the  widow  whom  he  refused  to  marry. 
He  was  thus  deprived  of  the  position  which  he  ought  to  have 
occupied  in  relation  to  her  and  to  his  deceased  brother,  or  to  his 
paternal  house  ;  and  the  disgrace  involved  in  this  was  still  further 
heightened  by  the  fact  that  his  sister-in-law  spat  in  his  face.     This 


424  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES  || 

is  the  meaning  of  the  words  (cf.  Num.  xii.  14),  and  not  merely  spit 
on  the  ground  before  his  eyes,  as  Saalschiltz  and  others  as  well  as  the 
Talmudists  (tr,  Jeham,  xii.  6)  render  it,  for  the  purpose  of  diminishing 
the  disgrace.  "  Build  up  his  brother  s  house"  i.e.  lay  the  foundation 
of  a  family  or  posterity  for  him  (cf.  Gen.  xvi.  2). — In  addition  to 
this,  the  unwilling  brother-in-law  was  to  receive  a  name  of  ridicule 
in  Israel:  ''House  of  the  shoe  taken  off"  (PV^'^  T^^,,  taken  off  as  to  his 
shoe ;  cf.  Eivald,  §  288,  b.),  i.e.  of  the  barefooted  man,  equivalent  to 
"the  miserable  fellow;"  for  it  was  only  in  miserable  circumstances 
that  the  Hebrews  went  barefoot  (vid.  Isa.  xx.  2,  3  ;  Micah  i.  8 ;  2 
Sam.  XV.  30).  If  the  brother-in-law  bore  this  reproach  upon  him- 
self and  his  house,  he  was  released  from  his  duty  as  a  brother-in-law. 
By  these  regulations  the  brother-in-law's  marriage  was  no  doubt 
recofi^nised  as  a  dutv  of  affection  towards  his  deceased  brother,  but  it 
was  not  made  a  command,  the  neglect  of  which  would  involve  guilt 
and  punishment.  Within  these  limits  the  brother-in-law's  marriage 
might  co-exist  with  the  prohibition  of  marriage  with  a  brother's 
wife;  "whereas,  if  the  deceased  brother  had  a  son  or  children, 
such  a  marriage  was  forbidden  as  prejudicial  to  the  fraternal  rela- 
tion. In  cases  where  the  deceased  was  childless,  it  was  commanded 
as  a  duty  of  affection  for  the  building  up  of  the  brother's  house, 
and  the  preservation  of  his  family  and  name.  By  the  former  pro- 
hibition, the  house  (family)  of  the  brother  was  kept  in  its  integrity, 
whilst  by  the  latter  command  its  permanent  duration  was  secured* 
In  both  cases  the  deceased  brother  was  honoured,  and  the  fraternal 
affection  preserved  as  the  moral  foundation  of  his  house"  (vid.  my 
Archdologie,  pp.  64,  65). 

Vers.  11  and  12,  "But  in  order  that  the  great  independence 
which  is  here  accorded  to  a  childless  widow  in  relation  to  her 
brother-in-law,  might  not  be  interpreted  as  a  false  freedom  granted 
to  the  female  sex"  {Baumgarten\  the  law  is  added  immediately 
afterwards,  that  a  woman  whose  husband  was  quarrelling  with 
another,  and  who  should  come  to  his  assistance  by  laying  hold  of 
the  secret  parts  of  the  man  who  was  striking  her  husband,  should 
have  her  hand  cut  off. 

Vers.  13-19.  The  duty  of  integrity  in  trade  is  once  more  en- 
forced in  vers.  13-16  (as  in  Lev.  xix.  35,  36).  ''Stone  and  stone" 
i.e.  two  kinds  of  stones  for  weighing  (cf.  Ps.  xii.  3),  viz.  large  ones 
for  buying  and  small  ones  for  selling.  On  the  promise  in  ver.  15J, 
see  chap.  iv.  26,  v.  16;  ver.  16a,  as  in  chap.  xxli.  5,  xviii.  12,  etc. 
In  the  concluding  words,  ver.  166,  "  all  that  do  unrighteously"  Moses 


CHAP.  xxvi.  1-11.  425 

sums  up  all  breaches  of  the  law. — Vers.  17-19.  But  whilst  the 
Israelites  were  to  make  love  the  guiding  principle  of  their  conduct 
in  their  dealings  with  a  neighbour,  and  even  with  strangers  and 
foes,  this  love  was  not  to  degenerate  into  weakness  or  indifference 
towards  open  ungodliness.  To  impress  this  truth  upon  the  people^ 
Moses  concludes  the  discourse  on  the  law  by  reminding  them  of  the 
crafty  enmity  manifested  towards  them  by  Amalek  on  their  march 
out  of  Egypt,  and  with  the  command  to  root  out  the  Amalekites 
(cf.  Ex.  xvii.  9-16).  This  heathen  nation  had  come  against  Israel 
on  its  journey,  viz.  at  Rephidim  in  Horeb,  and  had  attacked  its 
rear:  ^^  All  the  enfeebled  behind  thee,  ivhilst  thou  loast  faint  and 
iceary,  without  fearing  God"  33T,  lit.  to  tail,  hence  to  attack  or 
destroy  the  rear  of  an  army  or  of  a  travelling  people  (cf.  Josh.  x. 
19).  For  this  reason,  when  the  Lord  should  have  given  Israel  rest 
in  the  land  of  its  inheritance,  it  was  to  root  out  the  remembrance 
of  Amalek  under  heaven.  (On  the  execution  of  this  command,  see 
1  Sam.  XV.)  "  Thou  shalt  not  forget  it ;"  an  emphatic  enforcement 
of  the  "  remember"  in  ver.  17. 

Thanksgiving  and  Prayer  at  the  Presentation  of  First-fruits  and 
lithes. — Chap.  xxvi. 

To  the  exposition  of  the  commandments  and  rights  of  Israel 
Moses  adds,  in  closing,  another  ordinance  respecting  those  gifts, 
which  were  most  intimately  connected  with  social  and  domestic  life, 
viz.  the  first-fruits  and  second  tithes,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  the 
proper  consecration  to  the  attitude  of  the  nation  towards  its  Lord 
and  God. 

Vers.  1-11.  Of  the  fir^  of  the  fruit  of  the  ground,  which  was 
presented  from  the  land  received  from  the  Lord,  the  Israelite  was 
to  take  a  portion  (n"'^6<no  with  |0  partitive),  and  bring  it  in  a 
basket  to  the  place  of  the  sanctuary,  and  give  it  to  the  priest  who 
should  be  there,  with  the  words,  "  /  have  made  known  to-day  to  the 
Lord  thy  God,  that  I  have  come  into  the  land  which  the  Lord  siuore 
to  our  fathers  to  give  us,'*  upon  which  the  priest  should  take  the 
basket  and  put  it  down  before  the  altar  of  Jehovah  (vers.  1-4). 
From  the  partitive  ^T"^^!!^  we  cannot  infer,  as  Schultz  supposes, 
that  the  first-fruits  were  not  to  be  all  delivered  at  the  sanctuary, 
any  more  than  this  can  be  inferred  from  Ex.  xxiii.  19  (see  the  expla- 
nation of  this  passage).  All  that  is  implied  is,  that,  for  the  purpose 
described  afterwards,  it  was  not  necessary  to  put  all  the  offerings  of 
first-fruits  into  a  basket  and  set  them  down  before  the  altar.     WQ 


426  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

(vers.  2,  4,  and  chap,  xxviii.  5,  17)  is  a  basket  of  wicker-work,  and 
not,  as  Knohel  maintains,  the  Deuteronomist's  word  for  ^J>!^V  (Ex. 
xvi.  33).  "  The  priest"  is  not  the  high  priest,  but  the  priest  who 
had  to  attend  to  the  altar-service  and  receive  the  sacrificial  gifts. — 
The  words,  "  I  have  to-day  made  known  to  the  Lord  thy  God," 
refer  to  the  practical  confession  which  was  made  by  the  presentation 
of  the  first-fruits.  The  fruit  was  the  tangible  proof  that  they  were 
in  possession  of  the  land,  and  the  presentation  of  the  first  of  this 
fruit  the  practical  confession  that  they  were  indebted  to  the  Lord 
for  the  land.  This  confession  the  offerer  was  also  to  embody  in  a 
prayer  of  thanksgiving,  after  the  basket  had  been  received  by  the 
priest,  in  which  he  confessed  that  he  and  his  people  owed  their 
existence  and  welfare  to  the  grace  of  God,  manifested  in  the 
miraculous  redemption  of  Israel  out  of  the  oppression  of  Egypt 
and  their  guidance  into  Canaan. — Ver.  5.  *'^^|i  nnx  ''CjnK,  "  a  lost 
(perishing)  Aramcean  was  my  father"  (not  the  Aramaean,  Laban, 
wanted  to  destroy  my  father,  Jacoh^  as  the  Chald,,  Arab.,  Luther, 
and  others  render  it).  ^?N  signifies  not  only  going  astray,  wander- 
ing, but  perishing,  in  danger  of  perishing,  as  in  Job  xxix.  13,  Prov. 
xxxi.  6,  etc.  Jacob  is  referred  to,  for  it  was  he  who  went  down  to 
Egypt  in  few  men.  He  is  mentioned  as  the  tribe-father  of  the 
nation,  because  the  nation  was  directly  descended  from  his  sons, 
and  also  derived  its  name  of  Israel  from  him.  Jacob  is  called  an 
Aramaean,  not  only  because  of  his  long  sojourn  in  Aramaea  (Gen. 
xxix.-xxxi.),  but  also  because  he  got  his  wives  and  children  there 
(cf.  Hos.  xii.  13)  ;  and  the  relatives  of  the  patriarchs  had  accom- 
panied Abraham  from  Chaldaea  to  Mesopotamia  (Aram ;  see  Gen. 
xi.  30).  t^yp  ^np2,  consisting  of  few  men  (3,  the  so-called  beth 
essent,,  as  in  chap.  x.  22,  Ex.  vi.  3,  etc. ;  vid.  Eiuald,  §  299,  q.). 
Compare  Gen.  xxxiv.  30,  where  Jacob  himself  describes  his  family 
as  "  few  in  number.''  On  the  number  in  the  family  that  migrated 
into  Egypt,  reckoned  at  seventy  souls,  see  the  explanation  at  Gen. 
xlvi.  27.  On  the  multiplication  in  Egypt  into  a  great  and  strong 
people,  see  Ex.  i.  7,  9  ;  and  on  the  oppression  endured  there,  Ex.  i. 
11-22,  and  ii.  23  sqq. — The  guidance  out  of  Egypt  amidst  great 
signs  (ver.  8),  as  in  chap.  iv.  34. — Ver.  10.  "  So  shalt  thou  set  it 
down  (the  basket  with  the  first-fruits)  before  Jehovah"  These 
words  are  not  to  be  understood,  as  Clericus,  Knobel,  and  others 
suppose,  in  direct  opposition  to  vers.  4  and  5,  as  implying  that  the 
offerer  had  held  the  basket  in  his  hand  during  the  prayer,  but  simply 
as  a  remark  which  closes  the  instructions. — ^Ver.  11.  Rejoicing  in 


CHAP.  XX VI.  12-15.  427 

all  the  good,  etc.,  points  to  the  joy  connected  with  the  sacrificial 
meal,  which  followed  the  act  of  worship  (as  in  chap.  xii.  12).  The 
presentation  of  the  first-fruits  took  place,  no  doubt,  on  their  pil- 
grimages to  the  sanctuary  at  the  three  yearly  festivals  (chap,  xvi.)  ; 
but  it  is  quite  without  ground  that  liiehn  restricts  these  words  to 
the  sacrificial  meals  to  be  prepared  from  the  tithes,  as  if  they  had 
been  the  only  sacrificial  meals  (see  at  chap,  xviii.  3). 

Yers.  12-15.  The  delivery  of  the  tithes,  like  the  presentation 
of  the  first-fruits,  was  also  to  be  sanctified  by  prayer  before  the 
Lord.  It  is  true  that  only  a  prayer  after  taking  the  second  tithe 
in  the  third  year  is  commanded  here ;  but  that  is  simply  because 
this  tithe  was  appropriated  everywhere  throughout  the  land  to  festal 
meals  for  the  poor  and  destitute  (chap.  xiv.  28),  when  prayer  before 
the  Lord  would  not  follow  per  analogiam  from  the  previous  injunc- 
tion concerning  the  presentation  of  first-fruits,  as  it  would  in  the 
case  of  the  tithes  with  which  sacrificial  meals  were  prepared  at  the 
sanctuary  (chap.  xiv.  22  sqq.).  "^^Vy.  is  the  infinitive  Hiphil  for 
-i^Vrh,  as  in  Neh.  x.  39  (on  this  form,  vid,  Ges.  §  53,  3  Anm.  2 
and  7,  and  Ew.  §  131,  h.  and  244,  6.).  "  Saying  before  the  Lord" 
does  not  denote  prayer  in  the  sanctuary  (at  the  tabernacle),  but,  as 
in  Gen.  xxvii.  7,  simply  prayer  before  God  the  omnipresent  One, 
who  is  enthroned  in  heaven  (ver.  15),  and  blesses  His  people  from 
above  from  His  holy  habitation.  The  declaration  of  having  fulfilled 
the  commandments  of  God  refers  primarily  to  the  directions  con- 
cerning the  tithes,  and  was  such  a  rendering  of  an  account  as 
springs  from  the  consciousness  that  a  man  very  easily  transgresses 
the  commandments  of  God,  and  has  nothing  in  common  with  the 
blindness  of  pharisaic  self-righteousness.  "  /  have  cleaned  out  the 
holy  out  of  my  house :"  the  holy  is  that  which  is  sanctified  to  God, 
that  which  belongs  to  the  Lord  and  His  servants,  as  in  Lev.  xxi.  22. 
"1^3  signifies  not  only  to  remove,  but  to  clean  out,  wipe  out.  That 
which  was  sanctified  to  God  appeared  as  a  debt,  which  was  to  be 
wiped  out  of  a  man's  house  (Schultz). — Ver.  14.  "  /  have  not  eaten 
thereof  in  my  sorrow^  ''^^<,  from  |).ij,  tribulation,  distress,  signifies 
here  in  all  probability  mourning,  and  judging  from  what  follows, 
mourning  for  the  dead,  equivalent  to  "  in  a  mourning  condition," 
i.e.  in  a  state  of  legal  (Levitical)  uncleanness ;  so  that  ""^J^^  really 
corresponded  to  the  fc<»9^  which  follows,  except  that  t^OO  includes 
every  kind  of  legal  uncleanness.  "  1  have  removed  nothing  thereof 
as  unclean,''  i.e,  while  in  the  state  of  an  unclean  person.  Not  only 
not  eaten  of  any,  but  not  removed  any  of  it  from  the  house,  carried 


428 


THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


it  away  in  an  unclean  state,  in  which  they  were  forbidden  to  touch 
the  holy  gifts  (Lev.  xxii.  3).  "  And  not  given  (any)  of  it  on  account 
of  the  dead"  This  most  probably  refers  to  the  custom  of  sending 
provisions  into  a  house  of  mourning,  to  prepare  meals  for  the 
mourners  (2  Sam.  iii.  25  ;  Jer.  xvi.  7  ;  Hos.  ix.  4 ;  Tobit  iv.  17). 
A  house  of  mourning,  with  its  inhabitants,  was  regarded  as  unclean ; 
consequently  nothing  could  be  carried  into  it  of  that  which  was  sanc- 
tified. There  is  no  good  ground  for  thinking  of  idolatrous  customs, 
or  of  any  special  superstition  attached  to  the  bread  of  mourning ; 
nor  is  there  any  ground  for  understanding  the  words  as  referring  ta 
the  later  Jewish  custom  of  putting  provisions  into  the  grave  along 
with  the  corpse,  to  which  the  Septuagint  rendering,  ovk  eSco/ca  air 
avTOiv  Tw  TeOvrjKOTv,  points.     (On  ver.  15,  see  Isa.  Ixiii.  15.) 

Vers.  16-19.  At  the  close  of  his  discourse,  Moses  sums  up  the 
whole  in  the  earnest  admonition  that  Israel  would  give  the  Lord  its 
God  occasion  to  fulfil  the  promised  glorification  of  His  people,  by 
keeping  His  commandments  with  all  their  heart  and  soul. — Ver.  1(5. 
On  this  day  the  Lord  commanded  Israel  to  keep  these  laws  and 
rights  with  all  the  heart  and  all  the  soul  (cf.  chap.  vi.  5,  x.  12  sqq.). 
There  are  two  important  points  contained  in  this  (vers.  17  sqq.). 
The  acceptance  of  the  laws  laid  before  them  on  the  part  of  the 
Israelites  involved  a  practical  declaration  that  the  nation  would 
accept  Jehovah  as  its  God,  and  walk  in  His  way  (ver.  17) ;  and  the 
giving  of  the  law  on  the  part  of  the  Lord  was  a  practical  confirma- 
tion of  His  promise  that  Israel  should  be  His  people  of  possession, 
which  He  would  glorify  above  all  nations  (vers.  18,  19).  "  Thou 
hast  let  the  Lord  say  to-day  to  he  thy  God,"  i.e.  hast  given  Him 
occasion  to  say  to  thee  that  He  will  be  thy  God,  manifest  Himself  to 
thee  as  thy  God.  "  And  to  walk  in  His  ways,  and  to  keep  His  laios" 
etc.,  for  "  and  that  thou  wouldst  walk  in  His  ways,  and  keep  His 
laws.'*  The  acceptance  of  Jehovah  as  its  God  involved  eo  ipso  a 
willingness  to  walk  in  His  ways. — Vers.  18,  19.  At  the  same  time, 
Jehovah  had  caused  the  people  to  be  told  that  they  were  His 
treasured  people  of  possession,  as  He  had  said  in  Ex.  xix.  5,  6 ;  and 
that  if  they  kept  all  His  commandments.  He  would  set  them  highest 
above  all  nations  whom  He  had  created,  "  for  praise,  and  for  a 
name,  and  for  glory,"  i.e.  make  them  an  object  of  praise,  and 
renown,  and  glorification  of  God,  the  Lord  and  Creator  of  Israel, 
among  all  nations  (vid.  Jer.  xxxiii.  9  and  xiii.  11 ;  Zeph.  iii.  19,  20). 
"  And  that  it  should  become  a  holy  people  unto  the  Lord"  as  He  had 
already  said  in  Ex.  xix.  6.     The  sanctification  of  Israel  was  the 


I 


CHAP.  XXVII.  429 

desljTii  and  end  of  its  divine  election,  and  would  be  accomplished  in 
the  s^lory  to  which  the  people  of  God  were  to  be  exalted  (see  the 
commentary  on  Ex.  xix.  5,  6).  The  Hiphil  "'''^g'^,  which  is  only 
found  here,  has  no  other  meaning  than  this,  "  to  cause  a  person  to 
say,"  or  "give  him  occasion  to  say;"  and  this  is  perfectly  appro- 
priate here,  whereas  the  other  meaning  suggested,  "  to  exalt,"  has 
no  tenable  support  either  in  the  paraplirastic  rendering  of  these 
verses  in  the  ancient  versions,  or  in  the  Hithpael  in  Ps.  xciv.  4,  and 
moreover  is  altogether  unsuitable  in  ver.  17. 


III.— THIRD  DISCOURSE,  OR  RENEWAL  OF  THE  COVENANT. 
Chap,  xxvii.-xxx. 

The  conclusion  of  the  covenant  in  the  land  of  Moab,  as  the  last 
address  in  this  section  (chap.  xxix.  and  xxx.)  is  called  in  the  heading 
(chap,  xxviii.  69)  and  in  the  introduction  (chap.  xxix.  9  sqq.),  i.e. 
the  renewal  of  the  covenant  concluded  at  Horeb,  commences  with 
instructions  to  set  up  the  law  in  a  solemn  manner  in  the  land  of 
Canaan  after  crossing  over  the  Jordan  (chap,  xxvii.).  After  this 
there  follow^s  an  elaborate  exposition  of  the  blessings  and  curses 
which  would  come  upon  the  people  according  to  their  attitude 
tow^ards  the  law  (chap,  xxviii.).  And  lastly,  Moses  places  the 
whole  nation  with  a  solemn  address  before  the  face  of  the  Lord, 
and  sets  before  it  once  more  the  blessing  and  the  curse  in  powerful 
and  alarming  words,  with  the  exhortation  to  choose  the  blessing  and 
life  (chap.  xxix.  and  xxx.). 

ON  THE  SETTING  UP  OF  THE  LAW  IN  THE  LAND  OF  CANAAN. — 
CHAP.  XXVII. 

The  instructions  upon  this  point  are  divisible  into  two  :  viz.  (a) 
to  set  up  large  stones  covered  with  lime  upon  Mount  Ebal,  after 
crossing  into  Canaan,  and  to  build  an  altar  there  for  the  presenta- 
tion of  burnt-offerings  and  slain-offerings,  and  to  write  the  law  upon 
these  stones  (vers.  1-8) ;  and  (b)  to  proclaim  the  blessing  and  curse 
of  the  law  upon  Mount  Gerizim  and  Mount  Ebal  (vers.  11-26). 
These  two  instructions  are  bound  together  by  the  command  to 
observe  the  law  (vers.  9  and  10),  in  which  the  internal  or  essential 
connection  of  the  two  is  manifested  externally  also.     The  fulfilment 


430  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES.  , 

of  these  directions  after  the  entrance  of  Israel  into  Canaan  is  de- 
scribed in  Josh.  viii.  30-35.  The  act  itself  had  a  symbolical  mean- 
ing. The  writing  of  the  law  upon  stones,  which  were  erected  on  a 
mountain  in  the  midst  of  the  land,  with  the  solemn  proclamation 
of  blessings  and  curses,  was  a  practical  acknowledgment  of  the  law 
of  the  Lord  on  the  part  of  Israel, — a  substantial  declaration  that  they 
would  make  the  law  the  rule  and  standard  of  their  life  and  conduct 
^'^  the  land  which  the  Lord  had  given  them  for  an  inheritance. 

Yers.  1—10.  The  command  in  ver.  1  to  keep  the  whole  law 
^"ib^,  inf,  abs.  for  the  imperative,  as  in  Ex.  xiii.  3,  etc.),  with  which 
the  instructions  that  follow  are  introduced,  indicates  at  the  very 
outset  the  purpose  for  which  the  law  written  upon  stones  was  to  be 
set  up  in  Canaan,  namely,  as  a  public  testimony  that  the  Israelites 
who  were  entering  into  Canaan  possessed  in  the  law  their  rule  and 
source  of  life.  The  command  itself  is  given  by  Moses,  together 
with  the  elders,  because  the  latter  had  to  see  to  the  execution  of  it 
after  Moses'  death ;  on  the  other  hand,  the  priests  are  mentioned 
along  with  Moses  in  ver.  9,  because  it  was  their  special  duty  to 
superintend  the  fulfilment  of  the  commands  of  God. — Vers.  2  and 
3  contain  the  general  instructions ;  vers.  4-8,  more  minute  details. 
In  the  appointment  of  the  time,  "  on  the  day  when  ye  shall  pass 
over  Jordan  into  the  land,"  etc.,  the  word  "  day "  must  not  be 
pressed,  but  is  to  be  understood  in  a  broader  sense,  as  signifying  the 
time  when  Israel  should  have  entered  the  land  and  taken  possession 
of  it.  The  stones  to  be  set  up  were  to  be  covered  with  lime,  or 
gypsum  (whether  sid  signifies  lime  or  gypsum  cannot  be  deter- 
mined), and  all  the  words  of  the  law  were  to  be  written  upon  them. 
The  writing,  therefore,  was  not  to  be  cut  into  the  stones  and  then 
covered  with  lime  (as  J,  D,  Mich,  Ros.),  but  to  be  inscribed  upon 
the  plaistered  stones,  as  was  the  custom  in  Egypt,  where  the  walls 
of  buildings,  and  even  monumental  stones,  which  they  were  about 
to  paint  with  figures  and  hieroglyphics,  were  first  of  all  covered 
with  a  coating  of  lime  or  gypsum,  and  then  the  figures  painted 
upon  this  (see  the  testimonies  of  Minutoli,  Heeren,  Prohesch  in 
Hengstenherg' s  Dissertations,  i.  433,  and  Egypt  and  the  Books  of 
Moses,  p.  90).  The  object  of  this  writing  was  not  to  hand  down 
the  law  in  this  manner  to  posterity  without  alteration,  but,  as  has 
already  been  stated,  simply  to  set  forth  a  public  acknowledgment  of 
the  law  on  the  part  of  the  people,  first  of  all  for  the  sake  of  the 
generation  which  took  possession  of  the  land,  and  for  posterity,  only 
so  far  as  this  act  was  recorded  in  the  book  of  Joshua  and  thus  trans- 


CHAP.  XXVII.  1-10.  431 

mitted  to  future  generations. — Yer.  3.  Upon  the  stones  there  were 
to  be  written  "  all  the  icords  of  this  law : "  obviously,  therefore,  not 
only  the  blessings  and  curses  in  vers.  15-26  (as  Josephiis,  Ant.  iv. 
8,  44,  MasiuSj  Clericus,  and  others  maintain),  nor  only  Deuteronomy 
(J.  Gerhard,  A.  Osiander,  Vater,  etc.),  since  this  contained  no  in- 
dependent "  second  law,"  but  the  whole  of  the  Mosaic  law ;  not, 
indeed,  the  entire  Pentateuch,  with  its  historical  narratives,  its 
geographical,  ethnographical,  and  other  notices,  but  simply  the  legal 
part  of  it, — the  commandments,  statutes,  and  rights  of  the  Thorah, 
But  whether  all  the  613  commandments  contained  in  the  Penta- 
teuch, according  to  the  Jewish  reckoning  (vid.  Bertheau,  die  7 
Gruppen  Mos.  Ges.  p.  12),  or  only  the  quintessence  of  them,  with 
the  omission  of  the  numerous  repetitions  of  different  commands, 
cannot  be  decided,  and  is  of  no  importance  to  the  matter  in  hand. 
The  object  aimed  at  would  be  attained  by  writing  the  essential 
kernel  of  the  whole  law ;  though  the  possibility  of  all  the  com- 
mandments being  written,  of  course  without  the  reasons  and  exhor- 
tations connected  with  them,  cannot  be  denied,  since  it  is  not  stated 
how  many  stones  were  set  up,  but  simply  that  large  stones  were  to 
be  taken,  which  would  therefore  contain  a  great  deal.  In  the 
clause,  "  that  thou  mayest  come  into  the  land  which  Jehovah  thy  God 
giveth  thee"  etc.,  the  coming  involves  the  permanent  possession  of 
the  land.  Not  only  the  treading  or  conquest  of  Canaan,  but  the 
maintenance  of  the  conquered  land  as  a  permanent  hereditary  pos- 
session, was  promised  to  Israel;  but  it  would  only  permanently 
rejoice  in  the  fulfilment  of  this  promise,  if  it  set  up  the  law  of  its 
God  in  the  land,  and  observed  it. — Vers.  4-8.  In  the  further  ex- 
pansion of  this  command,  Moses  first  of  all  fixes  the  place  where 
the  stones  were  to  be  set  up,  namely,  upon  Mount  Ebal  (see  at 
chap.  xi.  29), — not  upon  Gerizim,  according  to  the  reading  of  the 
Samaritan  Pentateuch ;  for  since  the  discussion  of  the  question 
by  Verschuir  (dissertt.  phil.  eoceg.  diss.  3)  and  Gesenius  (de  Pent, 
Samar.  p.  61),  it  may  be  regarded  as  an  established  fact,  that  this 
reading  is  an  arbitrary  alteration.  The  following  clause,  "  thou 
shalt  plaister^^  etc.,  is  a  repetition  in  the  earliest  form  of  historical 
•svriting  among  the  Hebrews.  To  this  there  are  appended  in  vers. 
5-7  the  new  and  further  instructions,  that  an  altar  was  to  be  built 
upon  Ebal,  and  burnt-offerings  and  slain-offerings  to  be  sacrificed 
upon  it.  The  notion  that  this  altar  was  to  be  built  of  the  stones 
with  the  law  written  upon  them,  or  even  with  a  portion  of  them, 
needs  no  refutation,  as  it  has  not  the  slightest  support  in  the  words 


432  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


of  the  text.  For  according  to  tliese  the  altar  was  to  be  built  of 
unhewn  stones  (therefore  not  of  the  stones  covered  with  cement), 
in  obedience  to  the  law  in  Ex.  xx.  22  (see  the  exposition  of  this 
passage,  where  the  reason  for  this  is  discussed).  The  spot  selected  ■■ 
for  the  setting  up  of  the  stones  with  the  law  written  upon  it,  as  ■ 
well  as  for  the  altar  and  the  offering  of  sacrifice,  was  Ebal,  the 
mountain  upon  which  the  curses  were  to  be  proclaimed ;  not  Geri- 
zim,  which  was  appointed  for  the  publication  of  the  blessings,  for 
the  very  same  reason  for  which  only  the  curses  to  be  proclaimed  are 
given  in  vers.  14  sqq.  and  not  the  blessings, — not,  as  Schultz  sup- 
poses, because  the  law  in  connection  with  the  curse  speaks  more 
forcibly  to  sinful  man  than  in  connection  with  the  blessing,  or 
because  the  curse,  which  manifests  itself  on  every  hand  in  human 
life,  sounds  more  credible  than  the  promise ;  but,  as  the  Berlehurger 
Bible  expresses  it,  "  to  show  how  the  law  and  economy  of  the  Old 
Testament  would  denounce  the  curse  which  rests  upon  the  whole 
human  race  because  of  sin,  to  awaken  a  desire  for  the  Messiah,  who 
was  to  take  away  the  curse  and  bring  the  true  blessing  instead."  For 
however  remote  the  allusion  to  the  Messiah  may  be  here,  the  truth 
is  unquestionably  pointed  out  in  these  instructions,  that  the  law  pri- 
marily and  chiefly  brings  a  curse  upon  man  because  of  the  sinfulness 
of  his  nature,  as  Moses  himself  announces  to  the  people  in  chap. 
xxxi.  16,  17.  And  for  this  very  reason  the  book  of  the  law  was  to 
be  laid  by  the  side  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  as  a  "  testimony 
against  Israel"  (chap.  xxxi.  26).  But  the  altar  was  built  for  the 
offering  of  sacrifices,  to  mould  and  consecrate  the  setting  up  of  the 
law  upon  the  stones  into  a  renewal  of  the  covenant.  In  the  burnt- 
offerings  Israel  gave  itself  up  to  the  Lord  with  all  its  life  and  labour, 
and  in  the  sacrificial  meal  it  entered  into  the  enjoyment  of  the  bless- 
ings of  divine  grace,  to  taste  of  the  blessedness  of  vital  communion 
with  its  God.  By  connecting  the  sacrificial  ceremony  with  the 
setting  up  of  the  law,  Israel  gave  a  practical  testimony  to  the  fact 
that  its  life  and  blessedness  were  founded  upon  its  observance  of 
the  law.  The  sacrifices  and  the  sacrificial  meal  have  the  same  sig- 
nification here  as  at  the  conclusion  of  the  covenant  at  Sinai  (Ex. 
xxiv.  11). — In  ver.  8  the  writing  of  the  law  upon  the  stones  is  com- 
manded once  more,  and  the  further  injunction  is  added,  ''very 
plainly r — The  writing  of  the  law  is  mentioned  last,  as  being  the 
most  important,  and  not  because  it  was  to  take  place  after  the  sacri- 
ficial ceremony.  The  different  instructions  are  arranged  according 
to  their  character,  and  not  in  chronological  order. 


CHAP.  XXVII.  li-26.  433 

The  words  of  Moses  which  follow  in  vers.  9  and  10,  "  Be  silent, 
and  hearken,  0  Israel ;  To-day  thou  hast  become  the  'people  of  the  Lord 
thy  God"  show  the  significance  of  the  act  enjoined  ;  although 
primarily  they  simply  summon  the  Israelites  to  listen  attentively  to 
the  still  further  commands.  When  Israel  renewed  the  covenant 
with  the  Lord,  by  solemnly  setting  up  the  law  in  Canaan,  it  became 
thereby  the  nation  of  God,  and  bound  itself,  at  the  same  time,  to 
hearken  to  the  voice  of  the  Lord  and  keep  His  commandments,  as 
it  had  already  done  (cf.  chap.  xxvi.  17,  18). 

Vers.  11-26.  With  the  solemn  erection  of  the  stones  with  the 
law  written  upon  them,  Israel  was  to  transfer  to  the  land  the  bless- 
ing and  curse  of  the  law,  as  was  already  commanded  in  chap.  xi. 
29  ;  that  is  to  say,  according  to  the  more  minute  explanation  of  the 
command  which  is  given  here,  the  people  themselves  were  solemnly 
to  give  expression  to  the  blessing  and  the  curse :  to  the  former 
upon  Mount  Gerizim,  and  to  the  latter  upon  Ebal.  On  the  situa- 
tion of  these  mountains,  see  at  chap.  xi.  29.  To  this  end  six  tribes 
were  to  station  themselves  upon  the  top  or  side  of  Gerizim,  and  six 
upon  the  top  or  side  of  Ebal.  The  blessing  was  to  be  uttered  by 
the  tribes  of  Simeon,  Levi,  Judah,  Issachar,  Joseph,  and  Benjamin, 
who  sprang  from  the  two  wives  of  Jacob ;  and  the  curse  by  Reuben, 
with  the  two  sons  of  Leah's  maid  Zilpah,  and  by  Zebulun,  with 
Dan  and  Naphtali,  the  sons  of  Rachel's  maid  Bilhah.  It  was 
natural  that  the  utterance  of  the  blessing  should  be  assigned  to  the 
tribes  which  sprang  from  Jacob's  proper  wives,  since  the  sons  of 
the  wives  occupied  a  higher  position  than  the  sons  of  the  maids, — 
just  as  the  blessing  had  pre-eminence  over  the  curse.  But  in  order 
to  secure  the  division  into  two  sixes,  it  was  necessary  that  two  of 
the  eight  sons  of  the  wives  should  be  associated  with  those  who 
pronounced  the  curses.  The  choice  fell  upon  Reuben,  because  he 
had  forfeited  his  right  of  primogeniture  by  his  incest  (Gen.  xlix. 
4),  and  upon  Zebulun,  as  the  youngest  son  of  Leah.  "  They  shall 
stand  there  upon  the  curse  :"  i.e.  to  pronounce  the  curse. — Ver.  14. 
"  And  the  Levites  shall  lift  up  and  speak  to  all  the  men  of  Israel 
with  a  high  (loud)  voice:"  i.e.  they  shall  pronounce  the  different 
formularies  of  blessing  and  cursing,  turning  towards  the  tribes  to 
whom  these  utterances  apply ;  and  all  the  men  of  Israel  shall  an- 
swer "  Amen"  to  take  to  themselves  the  blessing  and  the  curse,  as 
uttered  by  them ;  just  as  in  the  case  of  the  priestly  blessing  in 
Num.  V.  22,  and  in  connection  with  every  oath,  in  which  the  person 
swearing  took  upon  himself  the  oath  that  was  pronounced,  by  reply- 
PENT. — VOL.  III.  2  E 


434  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

ing  "Amen."  "  The  Levites^^  are  not  all  the  members  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi,  but  those  "  in  whom  the  spiritual  character  of  Levi 
was  most  decidedly  manifested"  (Baumgarten),  i.e.  the  Levitical 
priests,  as  the  guardians  and  teachers  of  the  law,  and  those  who 
carried  the  ark  of  the  covenant  (Josh.  viii.  33).  From  the  passage 
in  Joshua,  where  the  fulfilment  of  the  Mosaic  injunctions  is  re- 
corded, we  learn  that  the  Levitical  priests  stationed  themselves  in 
the  centre  between  the  two  mountains,  with  the  ark  of  the  cove- 
nant, and  that  the  people  took  up  their  position,  on  both  sides,  oppo- 
site to  the  ark,  viz.  six  tribes  on  Gerizim,  and  six  on  Ebal.  The 
priests,  who  stood  in  the  midst,  by  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  then 
pronounced  the  different  formularies  of  blessing  and  cursing,  to 
which  the  six  tribes  answered  "  Amen."  From  the  expression 
"  all  the  men  of  Israel,"  it  is  perfectly  evident  that  in  this  particu- 
lar ceremony  the  people  were  not  represented  by  their  elders  or 
heads,  but  were  present  in  the  persons  of  all  their  adult  men  who 
were  over  twenty  years  of  age ;  and  with  this  Josh.  viii.  33,  when 
rightly  interpreted,  fully  harmonizes. 

In  vers.  15—26  there  follow  twelve  curses,  answering  to  the 
number  of  the  tribes  of  Israel.  The  Jirst  is  directed  against  those 
who  make  graven  or  molten  images  of  Jehovah,  and  set  them  up  in 
secret,  that  is  to  say,  against  secret  breaches  of  the  second  com- 
mandment (Ex.  XX.  4)  ;  the  second  against  contempt  of,  or  want  of 
reverence  towards,  parents  (Ex.  xxi.  17)  ;  the  third  against  those 
who  remove  boundaries  (chap.  xix.  14)  ;  the  fourth  against  the 
man  who  leads  the  blind  astray  (Lev.  xix.  14)  ;  the  ffth  against 
those  who  pervert  the  right  of  orphans  and  widows  (chap,  xxi  v.  17)  ; 
the  sixth  against  incest  with  a  mother  (chap,  xxiii.  1 ;  Lev.  xviii. 
8)  ;  the  seventh  against  unnatural  vices  (Lev.  xviii.  23)  ;  the  eighth 
and  ninth  against  incest  with  a  sister  or  a  mother-in-law  (Lev.  xviii. 
9  and  17)  ;  the  tenth  against  secret  murder  (Ex.  xx.  13 ;  Num. 
XXXV.  16  sqq.)  ;  the  eleventh  against  judicial  murder  ("  he  that 
taketh  reward  to  slay  a  soul,  namely^  innocent  blood :"  Ex.  xxiii. 
7,  8)  ;  the  twelfth  against  the  man  who  does  not  set  up  the  words 
of  this  law  to  do  them,  who  does  not  make  the  laws  the  model  and 
standard  of  his  life  and  conduct.  From  this  last  curse,  which 
applied  to  every  breach  of  the  law,  it  evidently  follows,  that  the 
different  sins  and  transgressions  already  mentioned  were  only 
selected  by  way  of  example,  and  for  the  most  part  were  such  as 
could  easily  be  concealed  from  the  judicial  authorities.  At  the 
same  time,  "  the  office  of  the  law  is  shown  in  this  last  utterance, 


CHAP.  XXVIII.  1-14.  435 

the  summing  up  of  all  the  rest,  to  have  been  pre-eminently  to  pro- 
claim condemnation.  Every  conscious  act  of  transgression  subjects 
the  sinner  to  the  curse  of  God,  from  which  none  but  He  who  has 
become  a  curse  for  us  can  possibly  deliver  us"  (Gal.  iii.  10,  13. 
0.  V.  Gerlach). — On  the  reason  why  the  blessings  are  not  given, 
see  the  remarks  on  ver.  4.  As  the  curses  against  particular  trans- 
gressions of  the  law  simply  mention  some  peculiarly  grievous  sins 
by  way  of  example,  it  would  be  easy  to  single  out  corresponding 
blessings  from  the  general  contents  of  the  law :  e.g.  "  Blessed  be 
he  who  faithfully  follows  the  Lord  his  God,  or  loves  Him  with  the 
heart,  who  honours  his  father  and  his  mother,"  etc. ;  and  lastly,  all 
the  blessings  of  the  law  could  be  summed  up  in  the  words,  "  Blessed 
be  he  who  setteth  up  the  words  of  this  law,  to  do  them." 

BLESSING  AND  CURSE. — CHAP.  XXVIII.  1-68. 

For  the  purpose  of  impressing  upon  the  hearts  of  all  the  people 
in  the  most  emphatic  manner  both  the  blessing  which  Israel  was  to 
proclaim  upon  Gerizim,  and  the  curse  which  it  was  to  proclaim  upon 
Ebal,  Moses  now  unfolds  the  blessing  of  fidelity  to  the  law  and  the 
curse  of  transgression  in  a  longer  address,  in  which  he  once  more 
resumes,  sums  up,  and  expands  still  further  the  promises  and  threats 
of  the  law  in  Ex.  xxiii.  20-33,  and  Lev.  xxvi. 

Vers.  1-14.  The  Blessing. — Ver.  1.  If  Israel  would  hearken 
to  the  voice  of  the  Lord  its  God,  the  Lord  would  make  it  the  highest 
of  all  the  nations  of  the  earth.  This  thought,  with  which  the  dis- 
course on  the  law  in  chap.  xxvi.  19  terminated,  forms  the  theme, 
and  in  a  certain  sense  the  heading,  of  the  following  description  of 
the  blessing,  through  which  the  Lord,  according  to  the  more  distinct 
declaration  in  ver.  2,  would  glorify  His  people  above  all  the  nations 
of  the  earth.  The  indispensable  condition  for  obtaining  this  blessing, 
was  obedience  to  the  word  of  the  Lord,  or  keeping  His  command- 
ments. To  impress  this  conditio  sine  qua  non  thoroughly  upon  the 
people,  Moses  not  only  repeats  it  at  the  commencement  (ver.  2),  and 
in  the  middle  (ver.  9),  but  also  at  the  close  (vers.  13,  14),  in  both  a 
positive  and  a  negative  form.  In  ver.  2,  "  the  way  in  which  Israel 
was  to  be  exalted  is  pointed  out"  {Schultz)  ;  and  thus  the  theme  is 
more  precisely  indicated,  and  the  elaboration  of  it  is  introduced. 
"  All  these  blessings  (those  mentioned  singly  in  what  follows)  will 
come  upon  thee  and  reach  thee."  The  blessings  are  represented  as 
actual  powers,  which  follow  the  footsteps  of  the  nation,  and  over- 


436  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


H 


take  it.  In  vers.  3-6,  the  fulness  of  the  blessing  of  God  in  all 
the  relations  of  life  is  depicted  in  a  sixfold  repetition  of  the  word 
"  blessed."  Israel  will  be  blessed  in  the  town  and  in  the  field,  the 
two  spheres  in  which  its  life  moves  (ver.  3)  ;  blessed  will  be  the 
fruit  of  the  body,  of  the  earth,  and  of  the  cattle,  i.e,  in  all  its  pro- 
ductions (ver.  4 ;  for  each  one,  see  chap.  vii.  13,  14)  ;  blessed  will 
be  the  basket  (chap.  xxyi.  2)  in  which  the  fruits  are  kept,  and  the 
kneading-trough  (Ex.  xii.  34)  in  which  the  daily  bread  is  prepared 
(ver.  5) ;  blessed  will  the  nation  be  in  all  its  undertakings  ("  coming 
in  and  going  out ;"  vid.  Num.  xxvii.  17). — ^Vers.  7-14  describe  the 
influence  and  effect  of  the  blessing  upon  all  the  circumstances  and 
situations  in  which  the  nation  might  be  placed :  in  vers.  7-10,  with 
reference  (a)  to  the  attitude  of  Israel  towards  its  enemies  (ver.  7)  ; 
(b)  to  its  trade  and  handicraft  (ver.  8)  ;  (c)  to  its  attitude  towards 
all  the  nations  of  the  earth  (vers.  9, 10).  The  optative  forms,  \^\  and 
*i^\  (in  vers.  7  and  8),  are  worthy  of  notice.  They  show  that  Moses 
not  only  proclaimed  the  blessing  to  the  people,  but  desired  it  for 
them,  because  he  knew  that  Israel  would  not  always  or  perfectly 
fulfil  the  condition  upon  which  it  was  to  be  bestowed.  "  Mai/  the 
Lord  he  pleased  to  give  thine  enemies  .  .  .  smitten  before  thee"  i.e.  give 
them  up  to  thee  as  smitten  ("".^B?  |ri3,  to  give  up  before  a  person,  to 
deliver  up  to  him  :  cf.  chap.  i.  8),  so  that  they  shall  come  out  against 
thee  by  one  way,  and  flee  from  thee  by  seven  ways,  i.e.  in  wild  dis- 
persion (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  7,  8). — Ver.  8.  ''May  the  Lord  command  the 
blessing  with  thee  (put  it  at  thy  disposal)  in  thy  barns  (granaries, 
store-rooms)  and  in  all  thy  business"  ("  to  set  the  hand ;"  see  chap, 
xii.  7). — Vers.  9,  10.  "  The  Lord  will  exalt  thee  for  a  holy  nation  to 
Himself y  .  .  .  so  that  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  shall  see  that  the  name 
of  Jehovah  is  named  upon  thee,  and  shall  fear  before  thee."  The  Lord 
had  called  Israel  as  a  holy  nation,  when  He  concluded  the  covenant 
with  it  (Ex.  xix.  5,  6).  This  promise,  to  which  the  words  "  as  He 
hath  sworn  unto  thee"  point  back,  and  which  is  called  an  oath, 
because  it  was  founded  upon  the  promises  given  to  the  patriarchs  M 
on  oath  (Gen.  xxii.  16),  and  was  given  implicite  in  them,  the  Lord  ™ 
would  fulfil  to  His  people,  and  cause  the  holiness  and  glory  of  Israel 
to  be  so  clearly  manifested,  that  all  nations  should  perceive  or  see 
"  that  the  name  of  the  Lord  is  named  upon  Israel."  The  name  of  the 
Lord  is  the  revelation  of  His  glorious  nature.  It  is  named  upon 
Israel,  when  Israel  is  transformed  into  the  glory  of  the  divine  nature  fl 
(cf.  Isa.  Ixiii.  19 ;  Jer.  xiv.  9).  It  was  only  in  feeble  commence-  ™ 
ments  that  this  blessing  was  fulfilled  upon  Israel  under  the  Old  Tes 


I 


CHAP.  XXVIII.  15-68.  437 

lament ;  and  it  is  not  till  the  restoration  of  Israel,  whicli  is  to  take 
place  in  the  future  according  to  Eom.  xi.  25  sqq.,  that  its  complete 
fulfilment  will  be  attained.  In  vers.  11  and  12,  Moses  returns  to 
the  earthly  blessing,  for  the  purpose  of  unfolding  this  still  further. 
"  Superabundance  will  the  Lord  give  thee  for  good  (i.e.  for  happiness 
and  prosperity ;  vid.  chap.  xxx.  9),  in  fruit  of  thy  hody^^  etc.  (cf. 
ver.  4).  He  would  open  His  good  treasure-house,  the  heaven,  to 
give  rain  to  the  land  in  its  season  (cf .  chap.  xi.  14 ;  Lev.  xxvi.  4,  5), 
and  bless  the  work  of  the  hands,  i.e.  the  cultivation  of  the  soil,  so 
that  Israel  would  be  able  to  lend  to  many,  according  to  the  prospect 
already  set  before  it  in  chap.  xv.  6. — Vers.  13,  14.  By  such  blessings 
He  would  "  make  Israel  the  head,  and  not  the  tail^^ — a  figure  taken 
from  life  {vid.  Isa.  ix.  13),  the  meaning  of  which  is  obvious,  and  is 
given  literally  in  the  next  sentence,  "  thou  icilt  be  above  only,  and  not 
beneath/*  i.e.  thou  wilt  rise  more  and  more,  and  increase  in  wealth, 
power,  and  dignity.  With  this  the  discourse  returns  to  its  com- 
mencement ;  and  the  promise  of  blessing  closes  with  another  en;- 
phatic  repetition  of  the  condition  on  which  the  fulfilment  depended 
(vers.  136  and  14.     On  ver.  14,  see  chap.  v.  29,  xi.  28). 

Vers.  15-68.  The  Curse,  in  case  Israel  should  not  hearken  to 
the  voice  of  its  God,  to  keep  His  commandments.  After  the  an- 
nouncement that  all  these  (the  following)  curses  would  come  upon 
the  disobedient  nation  (ver.  15),  the  curse  is  proclaimed  in  all  its 
extent,  as  covering  all  the  relations  of  life,  in  a  sixfold  repetition 
of  the  word  "cursed"  (vers.  16-19,  as  above  in  vers.  3-6) ;  and  the 
fulfilment  of  this  threat  in  plagues  and  diseases,  drought  and  famine, 
war,  devastation  of  the  land,  and  captivity  of  the  people,  is  so  de- 
picted, that  the  infliction  of  these  punishments  stands  out  to  view 
in  ever  increasing  extent  and  fearf ulness.  We  are  not  to  record 
this,  however,  as  a  gradual  heightening  of  the  judgments  of  God, 
in  proportion  to  the  increasing  rebellion  of  Israel,  as  in  Lev.  xxvi. 
14  sqq.,  although  it  is  obvious  that  the  punishments  threatened  did 
not  fall  upon  the  nation  all  at  once. — Vers.  16-19  correspond  pre- 
cisely to  vers.  3-6,  so  as  to  set  forth  the  curse  as  the  counterpart  of 
the  blessing,  except  that  the  basket  and  kneading-trough  are  men- 
tioned before  the  fruit  of  the  body. 

Vers.  20-26.  The  first  view,  in  which  the  bursting  of  the  threat- 
ened curse  upon  the  disobedient  people  is  proclaimed  in  all  its  forms. 
First  of  all,  quite  generally  in  ver.  20.  "  The  Lord  will  send  the 
curse  against  thee,  consternation  and  threatening  in  every  undertaking 


438  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

of  thy  hand  which  thou  carriest  out  (see  chap.  xii.  7),  till  thou  he 
destroyed^  till  thou  perish  quickly^  because  of  the  wickedness  of  thy 
doings,  because  thou  hast  forsaken  Me.''  The  three  words,  "TJ^O, 
npinp,  and  ^?V^p,  are  synonymous,  and  are  connected  together  to 
strengthen  the  thought.  "TJ^P,  curse  or  malediction ;  nDin^^n^  the 
consternation  produced  by  the  curse  of  God,  namely,  the  confusion 
with  which  God  smites  His  foes  (see  at  chap.  vii.  23)  ;  ^'^W^']  is  the 
threatening  word  of  the  divine  wrath. — Then  vers.  21  sqq.  in  detail. 
"  The  Lord  will  make  the  pestilence  fasten  upon  (cleave  to)  thee,  till 
He  hath  destroyed  thee  out  of  the  land  .  ,  .  to  smite  thee  with  giddiness 
and  fever  (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  16),  inflammation,  burning,  and  sword, 
blasting  of  corn,  and  mildew  (of  the  seed) ;"  seven  diseases  there- 
fore (seven  as  the  stamp  of  the  works  of  God),  whilst  pestilence  in 
particular  is  mentioned  first,  as  the  most  terrible  enemy  of  life. 
ripp'n,  from  PTl  to  burn,  and  ">n"]n,  from  "i^n  to  glow,  signify  inflam- 
matory diseases,  burning  fevers  ;  the  distinction  between  these  and 
rinij^  cannot  be  determined.  Instead  of  ^"^n,  the  sword  as  the  in- 
strument of  death,  used  to  designate  slaughter  and  death,  the 
Vulgate,  Arabic,  and  Samaritan  have  adopted  the  reading  nnh, 
cestus,  heat  (Gen.  xxxi.  40),  or  drought,  according  to  which  there 
would  be  four  evils  mentioned  by  which  human  life  is  attacked, 
and  three  which  are  injurious  to  the  corn.  But  as  the  LXX., 
Jon.,  Syr.,  and  others  read  ^'^n,  this  alteration  is  very  questionable, 
especially  as  the  reading  can  be  fully  defended  in  this  connection  ; 
and  one  objection  to  the  alteration  is,  that  drought  is  threatened  for 
the  first  time  in  vers.  23,  24.  P^'^^,  from  ^'^^  to  singe  or  blacken, 
and  f^Py_,  from  P^J  to  be  yellowish,  refer  to  two  diseases  which  attack 
the  corn :  the  former  to  the  withering  or  burning  of  the  ears,  caused 
by  the  east  wind  (Gen.  xli.  23) ;  the  other  to  the  effect  produced  by 
a  warm  wind  in  Arabia,  by  which  the  green  ears  are  turned  yellow, 
so  that  they  bear  no  grains  of  corn. — Vers.  23,  24.  To  this  should 
be  added  terrible  drought,  without  a  drop  of  rain  from  heaven  (cf. 
Lev.  xxvi.  19).  Instead  of  rain,  dust  and  ashes  should  fall  from 
heaven,  in:  construed  with  a  double  accusative  ;  to  make  the  rain 
of  the  land  into  dust  and  ashes,  to  give  it  in  the  form  of  dust  and 
ashes.  When  the  heat  is  very  great,  the  air  in  Palestine  is  often 
full  of  dust  and  sand,  the  wind  assuming  the  form  of  a  burning 
sirocco,  so  that  the  air  resembles  the  glowing  heat  at  the  mouth  of 
a  furnace  (Robinson,  ii.  504). — Vers.  25,  26.  Defeat  in  battle,  the 
very  opposite  of  the  blessing  promised  in  ver.  7.  Israel  should 
become  >^}Vl?,  "  a  moving  to  and  fro,''  i.e.  so  to  speak,  "  a  ball  for 


CHAP.  XXVIII.  15-68.  439 

all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  to  play  with"  (Schultz).  njyr,  here 
and  at  Ezek.  xxiii.  46,  is  not  a  transposed  and  later  form  of  njjjt, 
which  has  a  different  meaning  in  Isa.  xxviii.  19,  but  the  original, 
uncontracted  form,  which  was  afterwards  condensed  into  n^iT ;  for 
this,  and  not  n^JT,  is  the  way  in  which  the  Chethib  should  be  read 
in  Jer.  xv.  4,  xxiv.  9,  xxix.  18,  xxxiv.  17,  and  2  Chron.  xxix.  8, 
where  this  threat  is  repeated  (vid.  Eivald,  §  53,  b.).  The  corpses 
of  those  who  were  slain  by  the  foe  should  serve  as  food  for  the  birds 
of  prey  and  wild  beasts — the  greatest  ignominy  that  could  fall  upon 
the  dead,  and  therefore  frequently  held  out  as  a  threat  against  the 
ungodly  (Jer.  vii.  33,  xvi.  4  ;  1  Kings  xiv.  11,  etc.). 

Vers.  27-34.  The  second  view  depicts  still  further  the  visitation 
of  God  both  by  diseases  of  body  and  soul,  and  also  by  plunder  and 
oppression  on  the  part  of  their  enemies. — In  ver.  27  four  incurable 
diseases  of  the  body  are  threatened :  the  ulcer  of  Egypt  (see  at 
Ex.  ix.  9),  i.e.  the  form  of  leprosy  peculiar  to  Egypt,  elephantiasis 
{Aegypti  peculiare  malum :  Plin.  xxvi.  c.  1,  s.  5),  which  differed 
from  lepra  tuberosa,  however,  or  tubercular  leprosy  (ver.  35  ;  cf. 
Job  ii.  7),  in  degree  only,  and  not  in  its  essential  characteristics 
(see  Tobler,  mediz,  Topogr.  v.  Jerus.  p.  51).  ^vJV,  from  i'B'y,  a 
swelling,  rising,  signifies  a  tumour,  and  according  to  the  Kabbins  a 
disease  of  the  anus :  in  men,  tumor  in  posticis  partibus ;  in  w^omen, 
durius  quoddam  olLBrjfia  in  utero.  It  was  with  this  disease  that  the 
Philistines  were  smitten  (1  Sam.  v.).  y]\  (see  Lev.  xxi.  20)  and 
D^ri,  from  D"in,  to  scrape  or  scratch,  also  a  kind  of  itch,  of  which 
there  are  several  forms  in  Syria  and  Egypt. — Vers.  28,  29.  In 
addition  to  this,  there  would  come  idiocy,  blindness,  and  confusion 
of  mind, — three  psychical  maladies;  for  although  li'^JV  signifies 
primarily  bodily  blindness,  the  position  of  the  w^ord  between  idiocy 
and  confusion  of  heart,  i.e.  of  the  understanding,  points  to  mental 
blindness  here. — Ver.  29  leads  to  the  same  conclusion,  where  it 
is  stated  that  Israel  would  grope  in  the  bright  noon-day,  like  a 
blind  man  in  the  dark,  and  not  make  his  ways  prosper,  i.e.  not 
hit  upon  the  right  road  which  led  to  the  goal  and  to  salvation, 
would  have  no  good  fortune  or  success  in  its  undertakings  (cf.  Ps. 
xxxvii.  7).  Being  thus  smitten  in  body  and  soul,  it  would  be  only 
(^"^  as  in  chap.  xvi.  15),  i.e.  utterly,  oppressed  and  spoiled  evermore. 
These  words  introduce  the  picture  of  the  other  calamity,  viz.  the 
plundering  of  the  nation  and  the  land  by  enemies  (vers.  30-33). 
Wife,  house,  vineyard,  ox,  ass,  and  sheep  would  be  taken  away  by 
the  foe ;  sons  and  daughters  would  be  carried  away  into  captivity 


440  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

before  the  eyes  of  the  people,  who  would  see  it  and  pine  after  the 
children,  i.e.  with  sorrow  and  longing  after  them ;  "  and  thy  hand 
shall  not  he  to  thee  toioards  God,'^  Le.  all  power  and  help  will  fail 
thee.  (On  this  proverbial  expression,  see  Gen.  xxxi.  29  ;  and  on 
7?^,  in  ver.  30,  see  at  chap.  xx.  6.) — In  vers.  33,  34,  this  threat  is 
summed  up  in  the  following  manner :  the  fruit  of  the  field  and  all 
their  productions  would  be  devoured  by  a  strange  nation,  and  Israel 
would  be  only  oppressed  and  crushed  to  pieces  all  its  days,  and 
become  mad  on  account  of  what  its  eyes  would  be  compelled  to  see. 
Vers.  35-46.  The  third  view. — With  the  words,  'Hhe  Lord  will 
smite  thee,^^  Moses  resumes  in  ver.  35  the  threat  of  ver.  27,  to  set 
forth  the  calamities  already  threatened  under  a  new  aspect,  namely, 
as  signs  of  the  rejection  of  Israel  from  covenant  fellowship  with 
the  Lord. — Ver.  35.  The  Lord  would  smite  the  people  with 
grievous  abscesses  in  the  knees  and  thighs,  that  should  be  incur- 
able, even  from  the  sole  of  the  foot  to  the  crown  of  the  head. 
in  l^riK^  is  the  so-called  joint-leprosy,  a  form  of  the  lepra  tuberosa 
(vid,  Fruner,  p.  167).  From  the  clause,  however,  ''from  the  sole  of 
thy  foot  unto  the  top  of  thy  head^^  it  is  evident  that  the  threat  is  not 
to  be  restricted  to  this  species  of  leprosy,  since  "  the  upper  parts 
of  the  body  often  remain  in  a  perfectly  normal  state  in  cases  of 
leprosy  in  the  joints ;  and  after  the  diseased  parts  have  fallen  off, 
the  patients  recover  their  previous  health  to  a  certain  degree" 
(Pruner),  Moses  mentions  this  as  being  a  disease  of  such  a  nature, 
that  it  would  render  it  utterly  impossible  for  those  who  were 
afl&icted  with  it  either  to  stand  or  walk,  and  then  heightens  the 
threat  by  adding  the  words,  "  from  the  sole  of  the  foot  to  the  top  of 
the  head."  Leprosy  excluded  from  fellowship  with  the  Lord,  and 
deprived  the  nation  of  the  character  of  a  nation  of  God. — Vers.  36, 
37.  The  loss  of  their  spiritual  character  would  be  followed  by  the 
dissolution  of  the  covenant  fellowship.  This  thought  connects  ver. 
36  with  ver.  35,  and  not  the  thought  that  Israel  being  afflicted  with 
leprosy  would  be  obliged  to  go  into  captivity,  and  in  this  state 
would  become  an  object  of  abhorrence  to  the  heathen  (Schultz). 
The  Lord  would  bring  the  nation  and  its  king  to  a  foreign  nation 
that  it  did  not  know,  and  thrust  them  into  bondage,  so  that  it 
would  be  obliged  to  serve  other  gods, — wood  and  stone  (vid.  chap, 
iv.  28), — and  would  become  an  object  of  disgust,  a  proverb,  and  a 
byword  to  all  nations  whither  God  should  drive  it  (vid.  1  Kings 
ix.  7  ;  Jer.  xxiv.  9). — Vers.  38  sqq.  Even  in  their  own  land  the 
curse  would  fall  upon  every  kind  of  labour  and  enterprise.     Much 


I 


CHAP.  XXVIII.  15-68.  441 

seed  would  give  little  to  reap,  because  the  locust  would  devour  the 
seed ;  the  planting  and  dressing  of  the  vineyard  would  furnish  no 
wine  to  drink,  because  the  worm  would  devour  the  vine,  ripin  is 
probably  the  t^|r  or  I'f  of  the  Greeks,  the  convolvulus  of  the  Romans, 
our  vine-weevil. — Ver.  40.  They  would  have  many  olive-trees  in 
the  land,  but  not  anoint  themselves  with  oil,  because  the  olive-tree 
would  be  rooted  out  or  plundered  (/^,,  Niphal  of  7?^^  as  in  chap, 
xix.  5,  not  the  Kal  of  7K^5?  which  cannot  be  shown  to  have  the  in- 
transitive meaning  elahi), — Ver.  41.  Sons  and  daughters  would  they 
beget,  but  not  keep,  because  they  would  have  to  go  into  captivity. — 
Ver.  42.  All  the  trees  and  fruits  of  the  land  would  the  buzzer  take 
possession  of.  Wv,  from  ??^  to  buzz,  a  rhetorical  epithet  applied  to 
locustSy  not  the  grasshopper,  which  does  not  injure  the  fruits  of  the 
tree  or  ground  sufficiently  for  the  term  tJn^.,  "to  take  possession 
of,"  to  be  applicable  to  it. — ^Ver.  43.  Israel  would  be  utterly  im- 
poverished, and  would  sink  lower  and  lower,  whilst  the  stranger  in 
the  midst  of  it  would,  on  the  contrary,  get  above  it  very  high ;  not 
indeed  "because  he  had  no  possession,  but  was  dependent  upon 
resources  of  other  kinds "  (^Schultz),  but  rather  because  he  would 
be  exempted  with  all  his  possessions  from  the  curse  of  God,  just  as 
the  Israelites  had  been  exempted  from  the  plagues  which  came 
upon  the  Egyptians  (Ex.  ix.  6,  7,  26). — ^Ver.  44.  The  opposite  of 
vers.  12  and  13  would  come  to  pass. — In  ver.  46  the  address 
returns  to  its  commencement  in  ver.  15,  with  the  terrible  threat, 
"  These  curses  shall  be  upon  thee  for  a  sign  and  for  a  wonder,  and 
upon  thy  seed  for  ever^^  for  the  purpose  of  making  a  pause,  if  not  of 
bringing  the  whole  to  a  close.  The  curses  were  for  a  sign  and 
wonder  (HSiD,  that  which  excites  astonishment  and  terror),  inas- 
much as  their  magnitude  and  terrible  character  manifested  most 
clearly  the  supernatural  interposition  of  God  (yid.  chap.  xxix.  23). 
^^  For  ever  "  applies  to  the  generation  smitten  by  the  curse,  which 
would  remain  for  ever  rejected,  though  without  involving  the  per- 
petual rejection  of  the  whole  nation,  or  the  impossibility  of  the  con- 
version and  restoration  of  a  remnant,  or  of  a  holy  seed  (Isa.  x.  22, 
vi.  13 ;  Rom.  ix.  27,  xi.  5). 

Vers.  47-57.  The  fourth  view. — Although  in  what  precedes 
every  side  of  the  national  life  has  been  brought  under  the  curse, 
yet  love  to  his  people,  and  the  desire  to  preserve  them  from  the 
curse,  by  holding  up  before  them  the  dreadful  severity  of  the  wrath 
of  God,  impel  the  faithful  servant  of  the  Lord  to  go  still  further, 
and  depict  more  minutely  still  the  dreadful  horrors  consequent  upon 


442  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


I 


Israel  being  given  up  to  the  power  of  the  heathen,  and  first  of  all 
in  vers.  47-57  the  horrible  calamities  which  w^ould  burst  upon  Israel 
on  the  conquest  of  the  land  and  its  fortresses  by  its  foes. — Vers. 
47,  48.  Because  it  had  not  served  the  Lord  its  God  with  joy  and 
gladness  of  heart,  "/or  the  abundance  of  all,^  i.e.  for  the  abundance 
of  all  the  blessings  bestowed  upon  it  by  its  God,  it  would  serve  its 
enemies  in  hunger,  and  thirst,  and  nakedness,  and  want  of  every- 
thing, and  wear  an  iron  yoke,  i.e.  be  obliged  to  perform  the  hardest 
tributary  service  till  it  was  destroyed  (T'pti^n  for  l^^tJ^n^  as  in  chap, 
vii.  24). — Vers.  49,  50.  The  Lord  would  bring  against  it  from  afar 
a  barbarous,  hardhearted  nation,  which  knew  no  pity.  '^  From 
afar'*  is  still  further  strengthened  by  the  addition  of  the  words, 
^^  from  the  end  of  the  earths  The  greater  the  distance  off,  the  more 
terrible  does  the  foe  appear.  He  flies  thence  like  an  eagle,  which 
plunges  with  violence  upon  its  prey,  and  carries  it  off  with  its 
-claws ;  and  Israel  does  not  understand  its  language,  so  as  to  be  able 
to  soften  its  barbarity,  or  come  to  any  terms.  A  people  "^rw, 
hard  of  face^'  i.e.  upon  whom  nothing  makes  an  impression  (yid, 
Isa.  1.  7), — a  description  of  the  audacity  and  shamelessness  of  its 
appearance  (Dan.  viii.  23  ;  cf.  Prov.  vii.  13,  xxi.  29),  which  spares 
neither  old  men  nor  boys.  This  description  no  doubt  applies  to 
the  Chaldeans,  who  are  described  as  flying  eagles  in  Hab.  i.  6  sqq., 
Jer.  xlviii.  40,  xlix.  22,  Ezek.  xvii.  3,  7,  as  in  the  verses  before  us ;  Jl 
but  it  applies  to  other  enemies  of  Israel  beside  these,  namely  to  the 
great  imperial  powers  generally,  the  Assyrians,  Chaldeans,  and 
Romans,  whom  the  Lord  raised  up  as  the  executors  of  His  curse  m\ 
upon  His  rebellious  people.  Isaiah  therefore  depicts  the  Assyrians 
in  a  similar  manner,  namely,  as  a  people  with  an  unintelligible  lan- 
guage (chap.  V.  26,  xxviii.  11,  xxxiii.  19),  and  describes  the  cruelty  m\ 
of  the  Medes  in  chap.  xiii.  17,  18,  with  an  unmistakeable  allusion 
to  ver.  50  of  the  present  threat. — Vers.  51  sqq.  This  foe  would 
consume  all  the  fruit  of  the  cattle  and  the  land,  i.e.  everything 
which  the  nation  had  acquired  through  agi'iculture  and  the  breed- 
ing of  stock,  without  leaving  it  anything,  until  it  was  utterly  de- 
stroyed (see  chap.  vii.  13),  and  would  oppress,  i.e.  besiege  it  in  all 
its  gates  (towns,  vid.  chap.  xii.  12),  till  the  lofty  and  strong  walls 
upon  which  they  relied  should  fall  (T]^^  as  in  chap.  xx.  20). — Ver. 
53.  It  would  so  distress  Israel,  that  in  their  distress  and  siege  they 
would  be  driven  to  eat  the  fruit  of  their  body,  and  the  flesh  of  their 
own  children  (with  regard  to  the  fulfilment  of  this,  see  the  remarks 
on  Lev.  xxvi.  29). — This  horrible  distress  is  depicted  still  more  fully 


I 

I 
I 


CHAP.  XXVIII.  15-68.  443 

ill  vers.  54-57,  where  the  words,  "  in  the  siege  and  in  the  straitness^^ 
etc.  (ver.  53i),  are  repeated  as  a  refrain,  with  their  appalHng  sound, 
in  vers.  55  and  57. — Vers.  54,  bo.  The  effeminate  and  luxurious 
man  woukl  look  with  ill-favour  upon  his  brother,  the  wife  of  his 
bosom,  and  his  remaining  children,  "  to  give"  (so  that  he  would  not 
give)  to  one  of  them  of  the  flesh  of  his  children  which  he  was  con- 
suming, because  there  was  nothing  left  to  him  in  the  siege.  "  ITis 
eye  shall  he  evil"  i.e.  look  with  envy  or  ill-favour  (cf.  chap.  xv.  9). 
"i^N't^n  ^7npj  on  account  of  there  not  being  anything  left  for  himself. 
^3  with  v3  signifies  literally  " all  not"  i.e.  nothing  at  all.  "T"^^"?, 
an  infinitive,  as  in  chap.  iii.  3  (see  at  ver.  48). — Vers.  56,  57.  The 
delicate  and  luxurious  woman,  who  had  not  attempted  to  put  her 
feet  to  the  ground  (had  always  been  carried  therefore  either  upon  a 
litter  or  an  ass :  cf.  Judg.  v.  10,  and  Arvieux,  Sitten  der  Beduinen 
Ar.  p.  143),  from  tenderness  and  delicacy — her  eye  would  look 
with  envy  upon  the  husband  of  her  bosom  and  her  children,  and 
that  (vav  expl.)  because  of  (for)  her  after-birth,  which  cometh  out 
from  between  her  feet,  and  because  of  her  children  which  she  bears 
{sc.  during  the  siege)  ;  'for  she  will  eat  them  secretly  in  the  want  of 
everything"  that  is  to  say,  first  of  all  attempt  to  appease  her  hunger 
with  the  after-birth,  and  then,  when  there  was  no  more  left,  with 
her  own  children.  To  such  an  awful  height  would  the  famine  rise ! 
Vers.  58—68.  The  fifth  and  last  view. — And  yet  these  horrible 
calamities  would  not  be  the  end  of  the  distress.  The  full  measure 
of  the  divine  curse  would  be  poured  out  upon  Israel,  when  its  dis- 
obedience had  become  hardened  into  disregard  of  the  glorious  and 
fearful  name  of  the  Lord  its  God.  To  point  this  out,  Moses  describes 
the  resistance  of  the  people  in  ver.  58  ;  not,  as  in  vers.  15  and  45, 
as  not  hearkening  to  the  voice  of  the  Lord  to  keep  all  His  com- 
mandments, which  he  (Moses)  had  commanded  this  day,  or  which 
Jehovah  had  commanded  (ver.  45),  but  as  "  not  observing  to  do  all 
the  words  which  are  written  in  this  book,  to  fear  the  glorified  and 
fearful  name,"  (viz.)  Jehovah  its  God.  "  This  book"  is  not  Deu- 
teronomy, even  if  we  should  assume  that  Moses  had  not  first  of  all 
delivered  the  discourses  in  this  book  to  the  people  and  then  written 
them  down,  but  had  first  of  all  written  them  dow^n  and  then  read 
them  to  the  people  (see  at  chap.  xxxi.  9),  but  the  book  of  the  law, 
i.e.  the  Pentateuch,  so  far  as  it  was  already  written.  This  is  evi- 
dent from  vers.  60,  61,  according  to  which  the  grievous  diseases  of 
Egypt  were  written  in  this  book  of  the  law,  which  points  to  the 
book  of  Exodus,  where  grievous  diseases  occur  among  the  Egyptian 


444  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

plagues.  In  fact,  Moses  could  not  have  thought  of  merely  laying 
the  people  under  the  obligation  to  keep  the  laws  of  the  book  of 
Deuteronomy,  since  this  book  does  not  contain  all  the  essential  laws 
of  the  covenant,  and  was  never  intended  to  form  an  independent 
book  of  the  law.  The  infinitive  clause,  "  to  fear^^  etc.,  serves  to 
explain  the  previous  clause,  "  to  do^^  etc.,  whether  we  regard  the 
two  clauses  as  co-ordinate,  or  the  second  as  subordinate  to  the  first. 
Doing  all  the  commandments  of  the  law  must  show  and  prove  itself 
in  fearing  the  revealed  name  of  the  Lord.  Where  this  fear  is 
wanting,  the  outward  observance  of  the  commandments  can  only 
be  a  pharisaic  work-righteousness,  which  is  equivalent  to  a  trans- 
gression of  the  law.  But  the  object  of  this  fear  was  not  to  be  a 
God,  according  to  human  ideas  of  the  nature  and  working  of  God ; 
it  was  to  be  "  this  glorified  and  fearful  namey^  i.e.  Jehovah  the  abso- 
lute God,  as  He  glorifies  Himself  and  shows  Himself  to  be  fearful 
in  His  doings  upon  earth.  "  The  name^^  as  in  Lev.  xxiv.  11.  ^33^ 
in  a  reflective  sense,  as  in  Ex.  xiv.  4,  17,  18  ;  Lev.  x.  3. — Ver.  59. 
If  Israel  should  not  do  this,  the  Lord  would  make  its  strokes  and 
the  strokes  of  its  seed  wonderful,  i.e.  would  visit  the  people  and 
their  descendants  with  extraordinary  strokes,  with  great  and  lasting 
strokes,  and  with  evil  and  lasting  diseases  (ver.  60),  and  would 
bring  all  the  pestilences  of  Egypt  upon  it.  ^T*!!?  to  turn  back, 
inasmuch  as  Israel  was  set  free  from  them  by  the  deliverance  out 
of  Egypt,  ^p^  is  construed  with  the  plural  as  a  collective  noun. 
— ^Ver.  61.  Also  every  disease  and  every  stroke  that  was  not  written 
in  this  book  of  the  law, — not  only  those  that  were  written  in  the 
book  of  the  law,  but  those  also  that  did  not  stand  therein.  The 
diseases  of  Egypt  that  were  written  in  the  book  of  the  law  include 
the  murrain  of  cattle,  the  boils  and  blains,  and  the  death  of  the 
first-born  (Ex.  ix.  1—10,  xii.  29)  ;  and  the  strokes  (p"^^)  the  rest 
of  the  plagues,  viz.  the  frogs,  gnats,  dog-flies,  hail,  locusts,  and 
darkness  (Ex.  viii.-x.).  D?r,  an  uncommon  and  harder  form  of 
nhv^_  (Judg.  xvi.  3 ;  cf.  Ewald,  §  138,  a.).— Ver.  ^2,  Israel  would 
be  almost  annihilated  thereby.  "  Ye  will  he  left  in  few  people  (a 
small  number;  cf.  chap.  xxvi.  5),  whereas  ye  were  as  numerous  as 
the  stars  of  heaven^ 

Vers.  63  sqq.  Yea,  the  Lord  would  find  His  pleasure  in  the 
destruction  and  annihilation  of  Israel,  as  He  had  previously  rejoiced 
in  blessing  and  multiplying  it.  With  this  bold  anthropomorphic 
expression  Moses  seeks  to  remove  from  the  nation  the  last  prop  of 
false  confidence  in  the  mercy  of  God.     Greatly  as  the  sin  of  man 


I 


CHAP.  XXVni.  15-68.  445 

troubles  God,*  and  little  as  the  pleasure  may  be  which  He  has  in 
the  death  of  the  wicked,  yet  the  holiness  of  His  love  demands  the 
punishment  and  destruction  of  those  who  despise  the  riches  of  His 
goodness  and  long-suffering ;  so  that  He  displays  His  glory  in  the 
judgment  and  destruction  of  the  wicked  no  less  than  in  blessing 
and  prospering  the  righteous. — Vers.  635  and  64.  Those  who  had 
not  succumbed  to  the  plagues  and  strokes  of  God,  would  be  torn 
from  the  land  of  their  inheritance,  and  scattered  among  all  nations 
to  the  end  of  the  earth,  and  there  be  compelled  to  serve  other  gods, 
which  are  wood  and  stone,  which  have  no  life  and  no  sensation,  and 
therefore  can  hear  no  prayer,  and  cannot  deliver  out  of  any  distress 
(cf.  chap.  iv.  27  sqq.). — Vers.  Qd^  66.  When  banished  thus  among 
all  nations,  Israel  would  find  no  ease  or  rest,  not  even  rest  for  the 
sole  of  its  foot,  i.e.  no  place  where  it  could  quietly  set  its  foot,  and 
remain  and  have  peace  in  its  heart.  To  this  extreme  distress  of 
homeless  banishment  there  would  be  added  "  a  trembling  heart,  fail- 
ing of  the  eyes  (the  light  of  life),  and  despair  of  soul "  {vid.  Lev. 
xxvi.  36  sqq.). — Yer.  66.  "  Thy  life  will  he  hung  up  before  thee^^ 
i.e.  will  be  like  some  valued  object,  hanging  by  a  thin  thread  before 
thine  eyes,  which  any  moment  might  tear  down  (Knobel),  that  is  to 
say,  will  be  ever  hanging  in  the  greatest  danger.  "  Thou  wilt  7iot 
believe  in  thy  life^^  i.e.  thou  wilt  despair  of  its  preservation  (cf.  Job 
xxiv.  22).^ — ^Ver.  67.  In  the  morning  they  would  wish  it  were 
evening,  and  in  the  evening  would  wish  it  were  morning,  from 
perpetual  dread  of  what  each  day  or  night  would  bring. — Ver.  68. 
Last  of  all,  Moses  mentions  the  worst,  namely,  their  being  taken 
back  to  Egypt  into  ignominious  slavery.  "If  the  exodus  was  the 
birth  of  the  nation  of  God  as  such,  return  would  be  its  death" 
{Schultz).  "  In  ships :"  i.e.  in  a  way  which  would  cut  off  every 
possibility  of  escape.  The  clause,  "  by  the  way  whereof  I  spake  unto 
thee,  thou  shalt  see  it  no  more  again^^  is  not  a  more  precise  explana- 
tion of  the  expression  "  in  ships,"  for  it  was  not  in  ships  that  Israel 
came  out  of  Egypt,  but  by  land,  through  the  desert ;  on  the  con- 
trary, it  simply  serves  to  strengthen  the  announcement,  "  The  Lord 
shall  bring  thee  into  Egypt  again,"  namely,  in  the  sense  that  God 
would  cause  them  to  take  a  road  which  they  would  never  have  seen 
again  if  they  had  continued  in  faithful  dependence  upon  the  Lord. 

^  "  I  have  never  seen  a  passage  whicli  describes  more  clearly  the  misery  of  a 
guilty  conscience,  in  words  and  thoughts  so  fitting  and  appropriate.  For  this 
is  just  the  way  in  which  a  man  is  affected,  who  knows  that  God  is  offended,  i.e. 
who  is  harassed  with  the  consciousness  of  sin  "  {Luther). 


446  thp:  fifth  book  of  iMoses. 

This  was  the  way  to  Egypt,  in  reality  such  a  return  to  this  land  as 
Israel  ought  never  to  have  experienced,  namely,  a  return  to  slavery. 
"  There  shall  ye  he  sold  to  your  enemies  as  servants  and  maids,  and 
there  shall  he  no  huyer^^  i.e.  no  one  will  buy  you  as  slaves.  This 
clause,  which  indicates  the  utmost  contempt,  is  quite  sufficient  to 
overthrow  the  opinion  of  Ewald,  Riehn,  and  others,  already  referred 
to  at  pp.  385-6,  namely,  that  this  verse  refers  to  Psammetichus, 
who  procured  some  Israelitish  infantry  from  Manasseh.  Egypt  is 
simply  mentioned  as  a  land  where  Israel  had  lived  in  ignominious 
bondage.  "  As  a  fulfilment  of'  a  certain  kind,  we  might  no  doubt 
adduce  the  fact  that  Titus  sent  17,000  adult  Jews  to  Egypt  to 
perform  hard  labour  there,  and  had  those  who  were  under  17  years 
of  age  publicly  sold  (Josephus,  de  hell,  Jud.  vi.  9,  2),  and  also  that 
under  Hadrian  Jews  without  number  were  sold  at  Rachel's  grave 
{Jerome,  ad  Jer.  31).  But  the  word  of  God  is  not  so  contracted, 
that  it  can  be  limited  to  one  single  fact.  The  curses  were  fulfilled 
in  the  time  of  the  Romans  in  Egypt  {vid,  Philo  in  Flacc,  and  leg. 
ad  Caium),  but  they  were  also  fulfilled  in  a  horrible  manner  during 
the  middle  ages  {yid,  Depping,  die  Juden  im  Mittelalter)  ;  and  they 
are  still  in  course  of  fulfilment,  even  though  they  are  frequently  less 
sensibly  felt"  {Schultz). — Ver.  69  (or  chap.  xxix.  1)  is  not  the  close 
of  the  address  in  chap,  v.-xxviii.,  as  Schultz,  Knohel,  and  others  sup- 
pose; but  the  heading  to  chap.  xxix.  xxx.,  which  relate  to  the  making 
of  the  covenant  mentioned  in  this  verse  (yid.  chap.  xxix.  12,  14). 

CONCLUSION  OF  THE  COVENANT  IN  THE  LAND  OF  MOAB. — 
CHAP.  XXIX.  AND  XXX. 

The  addresses  which  follow  in  chap.  xxix.  and  xxx.  are  an- 
nounced in  the  heading  in  chap.  xxix.  1  as  "  words  (addresses)  of 
the  covenant  which  Jehovah  commanded  Moses  to  make  with  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  heside  the  covenant  which  He  made  ivith  them  in 
Horeh^^  and  consist,  according  to  vers.  10  sqq.,  in  a  solemn  appeal 
to  all  the  people  to  enter  into  the  covenant  which  the  Lord  made 
with  them  that  day ;  that  is  to  say,  it  consisted  literally  in  a  renewed 
declaration  of  the  covenant  which  the  Lord  had  concluded  with  the 
nation  at  Horeb,  or  in  a  fresh  obligation  imposed  upon  the  nation 
to  keep  the  covenant  which  had  been  concluded  at  Horeb,  by  the 
offering  of  sacrifices  and  the  sprinkling  of  the  people  with  the  sacri- 
ficial blood  (Ex.  xxiv.).  There  was  no  necessity  for  any  repetition 
of  this  act,  because,  notwithstanding  the  frequent  transgressions  on 


CHAP.  XXIX.  2-15.  447 

the  part  of  the  nation,  it  had  not  been  abrogated  on  the  part  of 
God,  but  still  remained  in  full  validity  and  force.  The  obligation 
binding  upon  the  people  to  fulfil  the  covenant  is  introduced  by 
Moses  with  an  appeal  to  all  that  the  Lord  had  done  for  Israel 
(chap.  xxix.  2-9)  ;  and  this  is  followed  by  a  summons  to  enter  into 
the  covenant  which  the  Lord  was  concluding  with  them  now,  that 
He  might  be  their  God,  and  fulfil  His  promises  concerning  them 
(vers.  10-15),  with  a  repeated  allusion  to  the  punishment  which 
threatened  them  in  case  of  apostasy  (vers.  16-29),  and  the  eventual 
restoration  on  the  ground  of  sincere  repentance  and  return  to  the 
Lord  (chap.  xxx.  1-14),  and  finally  another  solemn  adjuration,  with 
a  blessing  and  a  curse  before  them,  to  make  choice  of  the  blessing 
(vers.  15-20). 

Chap.  xxix.  2-9.  The  introduction  in  ver.  2a  resembles  that  in 
chap.  V.  1.  "  All  Israel"  is  the  nation  in  all  its  members  (see  vers, 
10,  11). — Israel  had  no  doubt  seen  the  mighty  acts  of  the  Lord  in 
Egypt  (vers.  2b  and  3 ;  cf.  chap.  iv.  34,  vii.  19),  but  Jehovah  had 
not  given  them  a  heart,  i.e,  understanding,  to  perceive,  eyes  to  see^ 
and  ears  to  hear,  until  this  day.  With  this  complaint,  Moses  does 
not  intend  to  excuse  the  previous  want  of  susceptibility  on  the  part 
of  the  nation  to  the  manifestations  of  grace  on  the  part  of  the  Lord, 
but  simply  to  explain  the  necessity  for  the  repeated  allusion  to  the 
gracious  acts  of  God,  and  to  urge  the  people  to  lay  them  truly  ta 
heart.  "  By  reproving  the  dulness  of  the  past,  he  would  stimulate 
them  to  a  desire  to  understand :  just  as  if  he  had  said,  that  for  a 
long  time  they  had  been  insensible  to  so  many  miracles,  and  there- 
fore they  ought  not  to  delay  any  longer,  but  to  arouse  themselves 
to  hearken  better  unto  God"  (Calvin).  The  Lord  had  not  yet  given 
the  people  an  understanding  heart,  because  the  people  had  not  yet 
asked  for  it,  simply  because  the  need  of  it  was  not  felt  (cf.  chap.  v. 
26). — Vers.  5  sqq.  With  the  appeal  to  the  gracious  guidance  of 
Israel  by  God  through  the  desert,  the  address  of  Moses  passes  im- 
perceptibly into  an  address  from  the  Lord,  just  as  in  chap.  xi.  14. 
(On  vers.  5,  6,  vid,  chap.  viii.  3,  4  ;  on  ver.  7,  vid.  chap.  ii.  26  sqq.^ 
and  chap.  iii.  1  sqq.  and  12  sqq.). — Ver.  9.  These  benefits  from  the 
Lord  demanded  obedience  and  fidelity.  "  Keep  the  words  of  this 
covenant"  etc.  (cf.  chap.  viii.  18).  ''''??*'??  to  act  wisely  (as  in  chap. 
xxxii.  29),  bearing  in  mind,  however,  that  Jehovah  Himself  is  the 
wisdom  of  Israel  (chap.  iv.  6),  and  the  search  for  this  wisdom 
brings  prosperity  and  salvation  (cf.  Josh.  i.  7,  8). 

Vers.  10-15.  Summons  to  enter  into  the  covenant  of  the  Lord^ 


448  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


I 


namely,  to  enter  inwardly,  to  make  the  covenant  an  affair  of  the 
heart  and 'life. — Yers.  10  sqq.  "  To-day,''  when  the  covenant-law 
and  covenant-right  were  laid  before  them,  the  whole  nation  stood 
before  the  Lord  without  a  single  exception — the  heads  and  the 
tribes,  the  elders  and  the  officers,  all  the  men  of  Israel.  The  two 
members  are  parallel.  The  heads  of  the  people  are  the  elders  and 
officers,  and  the  tribes  consist  of  all  the  men.  The  rendering  given 
by  the  LXX.  and  Syriac  (also  in  the  English  version  :  2?'.), 
"  heads  (captains)  of  your  tribes,'  is  at  variance  with  the  language. 
— Ver.  11.  The  covenant  of  the  Lord  embraced,  however,  not 
only  the  men  of  Israel,  but  also  the  wives  and  children,  and  the 
stranger  who  had  attached  himself  to  Israel,  such  as  the  Egyptians 
who  came  out  with  Israel  (Ex.  xii.  38  ;  Num.  xi.  4),  and  the 
Midianites  who  joined  the  Israelites  with  Hobab  (Num.  x.  29), ' 
down  to  the  very  lowest  servant,  "  from  thy  hewer  of  wood  to  thy 
drawer  of  water''  (cf.  Josh.  ix.  21,  27).— Ver.  12.  "  That  thou 
shouldest  enter  into  the  covenant  of  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  the  engage- 
ment on  oath,  which  the  Lord  thy  God  concludeth  with  thee  to-day '^ 
liy  with  3,  as  in  Job  xxxiii.  28,  "  to  enter  into,"  expresses  entire 
entrance,  which  goes  completely  through  the  territory  entered,  and 
is  more  emphatic  than  iT*!^^  fc^is  (2  Chron.  xv.  12).  "  Into  the 
oath:"  the  covenant  confirmed  with  an  oath,  covenants  being  al-  11 
ways  accompanied  with  oaths  {yid.  Gen.  xxvi.  28). — ^Ver.  13.  "  That 
He  may  set  thee  up  (exalt  thee)  to-day  into  a  people  for  Himself, 
and  that  He  may  he  (become)  unto  thee  a  God"  {yid,  chap,  xxviii.  9, 
xxvii.  9  ;  Ex.  xix.  5,  6). — Vers.  14,  15.  This  covenant  Moses  made 
not  only  with  those  who  are  present,  but  with  all  whether  present 
or  not;  for  it  was  to  embrace  not  only  those  who  were  living 
then,  but  their  descendants  also,  to  become  a  covenant  of  blessing 
for  all  nations  (cf.  Acts  ii.  39,  and  the  intercession  of  Christ  in 
John  xvii.  20). 

Vers.  16-29.  The  summons  to  enter  into  the  covenant  of  the 
Lord  is  explained  by  Moses  first  of  all  by  an  exposition  of  the  evil 
results  which  would  follow  from  apostasy  from  the  Lord,  or  the 
breach  of  His  covenant.     This  exposition  he  introduces  with  an  ■I 
allusion  to  the  experience  of  the  people  with  reference  to  the  worth- 
lessness  of  idols,  both  in  Egypt  itself,  and  upon  their  march  through 
the  nations,  whose  territory  they  passed  through  (vers.  16,  17). 
The  words,  "  for  ye  have  learned  how  we  dwelt  in  Egypt,  and  passed  M  j 
through  the  nations  ....  and  have  seen  their  abominations  and  their   m  I 
idols "  (gillulim :  lit.  clods,  see  Lev.  xxvi.  30),  have  this  significa- 


(I 


I 


CHAP.  XXIX.  16-29.  449 

tion  :  In  our  abode  in  Egypt,  and  upon  our  march  through  different 
lands,  ye  have  become  acquainted  with  the  idols  of  these  nations, 
that  they  are  not  gods,  but  only  wood  and  stone  (see  at  chap.  iv. 
28),  silver  and  gold.  l^'&5"nSj  as  in  chap.  ix.  7,  literally  *'  ye  know 
that  which  we  dwelt,"  i.e.  know  what  our  dwelling  there  showed, 
what  experience  we  gained  there  of  the  nature  of  heathen  idols. 
— Ver.  18.  "  That  there  may  not  he  among  you^^  etc. :  this  sentence 
may  be  easily  explained  by  introducing  a  thought  which  may  be 
easily  supplied,  such  as  "  consider  this,"  or  "  do  not  forget  what  ye 
have  seen,  that  no  one,  either  man  or  woman,  family  or  tribe,  may 
turn  away  from  Jehovah  our  God." — "  That  there  may  not  he  a  root 
among  you  which  hears  poison  and  wormwood  as  fruit  J'  A  striking 
image  of  the  destructive  fruit  borne  by  idolatry  (cf.  Heb.  xii.  15). 
Hosh  stands  for  a  plant  of  a  very  bitter  taste,  as  we  may  see  from 
the  frequency  with  which  it  is  combined  with  njypj  wormwood :  it  is 
not,  strictly  speaking,  a  poisonous  plant,  although  the  word  is  used 
in  Job  XX.  16  to  denote  the  poison  of  serpents,  because,  in  the  esti- 
mation of  a  Hebrew,  bitterness  and  poison  were  kindred  terms. 
There  is  no  other  passage  in  wdiich  it  can  be  shown  to  have  the 
meaning  "  poison."  The  sense  of  the  figure  is  given  in  plain 
terms  in  ver.  19,  "  that  no  one  when  he  hears  the  words  of  this  oath 
may  hless  himself  in  his  heart,  saying,  It  will  prosper  with  me,  for  I 
walk  in  the  firmness  of  my  heart^^  To  bless  himself  in  his  heart  is 
to  congratulate  himself.  rm^"jK^j  firmness,  a  vox  media ;  in  Syriac, 
firmness,  in  a  good  sense,  equivalent  to  truth ;  in  Hebrew,  gene- 
rally in  a  bad  sense,  denoting  hardness  of  heart ;  and  this  is  the 
sense  in  which  Moses  uses  it  here. — "  To  siveep  away  that  which  is 
saturated  with  the  thirsty  : "  a  proverbial  expression,  of  which  very 
different  interpretations  have  been  given  (see  Rosenmilller  ad  h,  Z.), 
taken  no  doubt  from  the  land  and  transferred  to  persons  or  souls  ; 
so  that  we  might  supply  Nephesh  in  this  sense,  "  to  destroy  all,  both 
those  who  have  drunk  its  poison,  and  those  also  who  are  still  thirst- 
ing for  it"  (Knohel).  But  even  if  we  were  to  supply  pX  (the  land), 
we  should  not  have  to  think  of  the  land  itself,  but  simply  of  its  in- 
habitants, so  that  the  thought  would  still  remain  the  same. — ^Vers. 
20,  21.  "  For  the  Lord  will  not  forgive  him  (who  thinks  or  speaks  in 
this  way)  ;  hut  then  will  His  anger  smoke  (break  forth  in  fire  ;  vid. 
Ps.  Ixxiv.  1),  and  H^s  jealousy  against  that  man,  and  the  whole  curse 
of  the  law  will  lie  upon  him,  that  his  name  may  he  hlotted  out  under 
heaven  (vid,  chap.  xxv.  19  ;  Ex.  xvii.  14).  The  Lord  will  separate 
him  unto  evil  from  all  the  trihes, — so  that  he  will  be  shut  out  from 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  2  F 


450  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  covenant  nation,  and  from  its  salvation,  and  be  exposed  to  de- 
struction,— according  to  all  the  curses  of  the  covenant.^^  Although 
the  pronominal  suffix  refers  primarily  to  the  man,  it  also  applies, 
according  to  ver.  18,  to  the  woman,  the  family,  and  the  tribe.  "  That 
is  written,"  etc.,  as  in  chap,  xxviii.  58,  61. — Vers.  22-24.  How 
thoroughly  Moses  was  filled  with  the  thought,  that  not  only  indivi- 
duals, but  whole  families,  and  in  fact  the  greater  portion  of  the 
nation,  would  fall  into  idolatry,  is  evident  from  the  further  expan- 
sion of  the  threat  which  follows,  and  in  which  he  foresees  in  the 
Spirit,  and  foretells,  the  extermination  of  whole  families,  and  the 
devastation  of  the  land  by  distant  nations ;  as  in  Lev.  xxvi.  31,  32, 
Future  generations  of  Israel,  and  the  stranger  from  a  distant  land, 
when  they  saw  the  strokes  of  the  Lord  which  burst  upon  the  land, 
and  the  utter  desolation  of  the  land,  would  ask  whence  this  devasta- 
tion, and  receive  the  reply.  The  Lord  had  smitten  the  land  thus  in 
His  anger,  because  its  inhabitants  (the  Israelites)  had  forsaken  His 
covenant.  With  regard  to  the  construction,  observe  that  "i^^fl,  in 
ver.  22,  is  resumed  in  ^"^^Sl,  in  ver.  24,  the  subject  of  ver.  22  being 
expanded  into  the  general  notion,  "  all  nations  "  (ver.  24).  With 
'IK")'!,  in  ver.  226,  a  parenthetical  clause  is  inserted,  giving  the  reason 
for  the  main  thought,  in  the  form  of  a  circumstantial  clause ;  and  to 
this  there  is  attached,  by  a  loose  apposition  in  ver.  23,  a  still  further 
picture  of  the  divine  strokes  according  to  their  effect  upon  the 
land.  The  nouns  in  ver.  23,  "  brimstone  and  salt  burning,^*  are  in 
apposition  to  the  strokes  (plagues),  and  so  far  depend  upon  "  they 
see."  The  description  is  borrowed  from  the  character  of  the  Dead 
Sea  and  its  vicinity,  to  which  there  is  an  express  allusion  in  the 
words,  "  like  the  overthrow  of  Sodom,^  etc.,  Le.  of  the  towns  of  the 
vale  of  Siddim  (see  at  Gen.  xiv.  2),  which  resembled  paradise,  the 
garden  of  Jehovah,  before  their  destruction  {yid.  Gen;  xiii.  10  and 
xix.  24  sqq.). — ^Ver.  24.  "  What  is  this  great  bunmig  of  wrath  ?  "  i,e, 
what  does  it  mean — whence  does  it  come  ?  The  reply  to  such  a 
question  would  be  (vers.  25—29)  :  The  inhabitants  of  the  land  have 
forsaken  the  covenant  of  the  Lord,  the  God  of  their  fathers  ;  there- 
fore has  the  wrath  of  the  Lord  burned  over  the  land. — Ver.  26. 
"  Gods  which  God  had  not  assigned  them^^  (yid,  chap.  iv.  19).  "  All 
the  curses,"  etc.,  are  the  curses  contained  in  chap,  xxviii.  15-68, 
Lev.  xxvi.  14-38. — Those  who  give  the  answer  close  their  address 
in  ver.  29  with  an  expression  of  pious  submission  and  solemn 
admonition.  "  That  which  is  hidden  belongs  to  the  Lord  our  God 
(is  His  affair),  and  that  which  is  revealed  belongs  to  us  and  our  chil- 


I 


I 


CHAP.  XXX.  1-10.  451 

dren  for  ever,  to  do  (that  we  may  do)  all  the  words  of  this  law" 
That  which  is  revealed  includes  the  law  with  its  promises  and  threats ; 
consequently  that  which  is  hidden  can  only  refer  to  the  mode  in 
which  God  will  carry  out  in  the  future  His  counsel  and  will,  which 
He  has  revealed  in  the  law,  and  complete  His  work  of  salvation 
notwithstanding  the  apostasy  of  the  people.^ 

Chap.  XXX.  1-10.  Nevertheless  the  rejection  of  Israel  and  its 
dispersion  among  the  heathen  were  not  to  be  the  close.  If  the 
people  should  return  to  the  Lord  their  God  in  their  exile.  He  would 
turn  His  favour  towards  them  again,  and  gather  them  again  out  of 
their  dispersion,  as  had  already  been  proclaimed  in  chap.  iv.  29  sqq. 
and  Lev.  xxvi.  40  sqq.,  where  it  was  also  observed  that  the  extre- 
mity of  their  distress  would  bring  the  people  to  reflection  and  induce 
them  to  return. — Vers.  1-3.  "  When  all  these  words,  the  blessing  and 
the  curse  which  I  have  set  before  thee,  shall  corned  The  allusion  to 
the  blessing  in  this  connection  may  be  explained  on  the  ground  that 
Moses  was  surveying  the  future  generally,  in  which  not  only  a  curse 
but  a  blessing  also  would  come  upon  the  nation,  according  to  its 
attitude  towards  the  Lord  as  a  whole  and  in  its  several  members, 
since  even  in  times  of  the  greatest  apostasy  on  the  part  of  the 
nation  there  would  always  be  a  holy  seed  which  could  not  die  out ; 
because  otherwise  the  nation  would  necessarily  have  been  utterly 
and  for  ever  rejected,  whereby  the  promises  of  God  would  have 
been  brought  to  nought, — a  result  which  was  absolutely  impossible. 
"  And  thou  takest  to  heart  among  all  nations,"  etc.,  sc.  what  has  be- 
fallen thee, — not  only  the  curse  which  presses  upon  thee,  but  also 
the  blessing  which  accompanies  obedience  to  the  commands  of 
God, — "  and  returnest  to  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  hearkenest  to  His 
voice  with  all  the  heart,"  etc.  (cf .  chap.  iv.  29)  ;  "  the  Lord  will  turn 
thy  captivity,  and  have  compassion  upon  thee,  and  gather  thee  again" 
r\\2\irr\^  y:^  does  not  mean  to  bring  back  the  prisoners,  as  the 
more  modern  lexicographers  erroneously  suppose  (the  Kal  y\'^  never 
has  the  force  of  the  Hiphil),  but  to  turn  the  imprisonment,  and  that 

*  What  the  puncta  extraordinaria  above  (n)y  !iJ''n^1  ^:h  mean,  is  uncertain. 
HilUr's  conjecture  is  the  most  probable,  "  that  they  are  intended  to  indicate  a 
various  reading,  formed  by  the  omission  of  eleven  consonants,  and  the  transpo- 
sition of  the  rest  D;iy  ni?niini  {at  magnalia  sseculi  sunt)  ;  "  whereas  there  is  no 
foundation  for  Light/oofs  notion,  that  "  they  served  as  a  warning,  that  we 
should  not  wish  to  pry  with  curiosity  into  the  secret  things  of  God,  but  should 
be  content  with  His  revealed  will," — a  notion  which  rests  upon  the  suppositioo 
that  the  points  are  inspired. 


452  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

in  a  figurative  sense,  viz.  to  put  an  end  to  the  distress  (Job  xlii.  10; 
Jer.  XXX.  8 ;  Ezek.  xvi.  53 ;  Ps.  xiv.  7 ;  also  Ps.  Ixxxv.  2,  cxxvi. 
2,  4),  except  that  in  many  passages  the  misery  of  exile  in  which  the 
people  pined  is  represented  as  imprisonment.  The  passage  before 
us  is  fully  decisive  against  the  meaning  to  bring  back  the  prisoners, 
since  the  gathering  out  of  the  heathen  is  spoken  of  as  being  itself 
the  consequence  of  the  "  turning  of  the  captivity ;  "  so  also  is  Jer. 
xxix.  14,  vs^here  the  bringing  back  (^^^(?)  is  expressly  distinguished 
from  it.  But  especially  is  this  the  case  with  Jer.  xxx.  18,  where 
"  turning  the  captivity  of  Jacob's  tents"  is  synonymous  with  having 
mercy  on  his  dwelling-places,  and  building  up  the  city  again,  so 
that  the  city  lying  in  ruins  is  represented  as  nUK^,  an  imprisonment.^ 
— Vers.  4,  5.  The  gathering  of  Israel  out  of  all  the  countries  of 
the  earth  would  then  follow.  Even  though  the  rejected  people 
should  be  at  the  end  of  heaven,  the  Lord  would  fetch  them  thence, 
and  bring  them  back  into  the  land  of  their  fathers,  and  do  good  to 
the  nation,  and  multiply  them  above  their  fathers.  These  last 
words  show  that  the  promise  neither  points  directly  to  the  gathering 
of  Israel  from  dispersion  on  its  ultimate  conversion  to  Christ,  nor 
furnishes  any  proof  that  the  Jews  will  then  be  brought  back  to 
Palestine.  It  is  true  that  even  these  words  have  some  reference  to 
the  final  redemption  of  Israel.  This  is  evident  from  the  curse  of 
dispersion,  which  cannot  be  restricted  to  the  Assyrian  and  Babylo- 
nian captivities,  but  includes  the  Roman  dispersion  also,  in  which 
the  nation  continues  still ;  and  it  is  still  more  apparent  from  the 
renewal  of  this  promise  in  Jer.  xxxii.  37  and  other  prophetic  pas- 
sages. But  this  application  is  to  be  found  in  the  spirit,  and  not  in 
the  letter.  For  if  there  is  to  be  an  increase  in  the  number  of  the 
Jews,  when  gathered  out  of  their  dispersion  into  all  the  world, 
above  the  number  of  their  fathers,  and  therefore  above  the  number 
of  the  Israelites  in  the  time  of  Solomon  and  the  first  monarchs  of 
the  two  kingdoms,  Palestine  will  never  furnish  room  enough  for  a 
nation  multiplied  like  this.  The  multiplication  promised  here,  so 
far  as  it  falls  within  the  Messianic  age,  will '  consist  in  the  realiza- 

^  Hupfeld  (on  Ps.  xiv.  7)  has  endeavoured  to  sustain  the  assertion  that  n^lK? 
is  a  later  form  for  the  older  and  simpler  forms,  i^ic^,  iT'^Ci',  by  citing  one  single 

•   :  T :   • 

passage  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  abstract  form  of  '•aC'  is  n"•:l5^^  imprisonment 
(Num.  xxi.  29),  then  prisoners.  This  form  has  been  substituted  by  Jeremiah 
for  n^nty  in  one  passage,  viz.  chap,  xxxii.  44 ;  and  the  Masoretic  punctuators 
were  the  first  to  overlook  the  difference  in  the  two  words,  and  point  them  pro- 
miscuously. 


CHAP.  XXX.  1-10.  453 

tion  of  the  promise  given  to  Abraham,  that  his  seed  should  grow 
into  nations  (Gen.  xvii.  6  and  16),  i.e.  in  the  innumerable  multipli- 
cation, not  of  the  "Israel  according  to  the  flesh,"  but  of  the  "Israel 
according  to  the  spirit,"  whose  land  is  not  restricted  to  the  boun- 
daries of  the  earthly  Canaan  or  Palestine  (see  vol.  i.  p.  226).  The 
possession  of  the  earthly  Canaan  for  all  time  is  nowhere  promised 
to  the  Israehtish  nation  in  the  law  (see  at  chap.  xi.  21). — Ver.  6. 
The  Lord  will  then  circumcise  their  heart,  and  the  heart  of  their 
children  (see  chap.  x.  16),  so  that  they  will  love  Him  with  all  their 
heart.  When  Israel  should  turn  with  true  humility  to  the  Lord, 
He  would  be  found  of  them, — would  lead  them  to  true  repentance, 
and  sanctify  them  through  the  power  of  His  grace, — would  take 
away  the  stony  heart  out  of  their  flesh,  and  give  them  a  heart  of 
flesh,  a  new  heart  and  a  new  spirit, — so  that  they  should  truly  know 
Him  and  keep  His  commandments  (vid.  Ezek.  xi.  19,  xxxvi.  26 ; 
Jer.  xxxi.  33  sqq.  and  xxxii.  39  sqq.).  "  Because  of  tliy  life^^  Le. 
that  thou  mayest  live,  sc.  attain  to  true  life.  The  fulfilment  of  this 
promise  does  not  take  place  all  at  once.  It  commenced  with  small 
beginnings  at  the  deliverance  from  the  Babylonian  exile,  and  in  a 
still  higher  degree  at  the  appearance  of  Christ  in  the  case  of  all 
the  Israelites  who  received  Him  as  their  Saviour.  Since  then  it 
has  been  carried  on  through  all  ages  in  the  conversion  of  individual 
children  of  Abraham  to  Christ;  and  it  will  be  realized  in  the  future 
in  a  still  more  glorious  manner  in  the  nation  at  large  (Eom.  xi.  25 
sqq.).  The  words  of  Moses  do  not  relate  to  any  particular  age,  but 
comprehend  all  times.  For  Israel  has  never  been  hardened  and 
rejected  in  all  its  members,  although  the  mass  of  the  nation  lives 
under  the  curse  even  to  the  present  day. — Ver.  7.  But  after  its 
conversion,  the  curses,  which  had  hitherto  rested  upon  it,  would  fall 
upon  its  enemies  and  haters,  according  to  the  promise  in  Gen.  xii. 
3. — Vers.  8  sqq.  Israel  would  then  hearken  again  to  the  voice  of 
the  Lord  and  keep  His  commandments,  and  would  rejoice  in  con- 
sequence in  the  richest  blessing  of  its  God.  In  the  expression, 
nyD'^'T  y^m  nnt?  (^'thou  shalt   return  and  hearken''),  31K^n  (^^tJiou 

t:-t:tt-\  /7t\ 

shalt  return  ")  has  an  adverbial  signification.  This  is  evident  from 
the  corresponding  expression  in  ver.  9&,  "  for  Jehovah  will  again 
rejoice  over  thee"  {lit.  "will  return  and  rejoice"),  in  which  the 
adverbial  signification  is  placed  beyond  all  doubt. — Vers.  8-10  con- 
tain the  general  thought,  that  Israel  would  then  come  again  into  its 
normal  relation  to  its  God,  would  enter  into  true  and  perfect  cove- 
nant fellowship  with  the  Lord,  and  enjoy  all  the  blessings  of  the 


454  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

covenant. — ^Ver.  9a  is  a  repetition  of  chap,  xxviii.  11.  The  Lord 
will  rejoice  again  over  Israel,  to  do  them  good  (vid.  chap,  xxviii.  63), 
as  He  had  rejoiced  over  their  fathers.  The  fathers  are  not  the 
patriarchs  alone,  but  all  the  pious  ancestors  of  the  people. — ^Ver.  10. 
A  renewed  enforcement  of  the  indispensable  condition  of  salvation. 
Vers.  11-20.  The  fulfilment  of  this  condition  is  not  impossible, 
nor  really  very  difficult.  This  natural  thought  leads  to  the  motive, 
which  Moses  impresses  upon  the  hearts  of  the  people  in  vers.  11-14, 
viz.  that  He  might  turn  the  blessing  to  them.  God  had  done  every- 
thing to  render  the  observance  of  His  commandments  possible  to 
Israel.  "  This  commandment "  (used  as  in  chap.  vi.  1  to  denote  the 
whole  law)  is  "  not  too  wonderful  for  thee^^  i.e.  is  not  too  hard  to 
grasp,  or  unintelligible  {yid.  chap.  xvii.  8),  nor  is  it  too  far  off  :  it  is 
neither  in  heaven,  i.e.  at  an  inaccessible  height ;  nor  beyond  the  sea, 
i.e.  at  an  unattainable  distance,  at  the  end  of  the  world,  so  that  any 
one  could  say.  Who  is  able  to  fetch  it  thence  1  but  it  is  very  near 
thee,  in  thy  mouth  and  in  thy  heart  to  do  it.  It  not  only  lay  before 
the  people  in  writing,  but  it  was  also  preached  to  them  by  word  of 
mouth,  and  thus  brought  to  their  knowledge,  so  that  it  had  become 
a  subject  of  conversation  as  well  as  of  reflection  and  careful  exami- 
nation. But  however  near  the  law  had  thus  been  brought  to  man, 
sin  had  so  estranged  the  human  heart  from  the  word  of  God,  that 
doing  and  keeping  the  law  had  become  invariably  difficult,  and  in 
fact  impossible ;  so  that  the  declaration,  "  the  word  is  in  thy  heart," 
only  attains  its  full  realization  through  the  preaching  of  the  gospel 
of  the  grace  of  God,  and  the  righteousness  that  is  by  faith ;  and 
to  this  the  Apostle  Paul  applies  the  passage  in  Rom.  x.  25  sqq. 
— Vers.  15—20.  In  conclusion,  Moses  sums  up  the  contents  of  the 
whole  of  this  preaching  of  the  law  in  the  words,  "  life  and  good, 
and  death  and  evil,"  as  he  had  already  done  at  chap.  xi.  26,  27,  in 
the  first  part  of  this  address,  to  lay  the  people  by  a  solemn  adjura- 
tion under  the  obligation  to  be  faithful  to  the  Lord,  and  through 
this  obligation  to  conclude  the  covenant  afresh.  He  had  set  before 
them  this  day  life  and  good  Q'good"  =  prosperity  and  salvation),  as 
well  as  death  and  evil  (jn,  adversity  and  destruction),  by  command- 
ing them  to  love  the  Lord  and  walk  in  His  ways.  Love  is  placed 
first,  as  in  chap.  vi.  5,  as  being  the  essential  principle  of  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  commandments.  Expounding  the  law  was  setting 
before  them  life  and  death,  salvation  and  destruction,  because  the 
law,  as  the  word  of  God,  was  living  and  powerful,  and  proved  itself 
in  every  man  a  power  of  life  or  of  death,  according  to  the  attitude 


I 


CHAP.  XXXI.  455 

which  he  assumed  towards  it  (vid.  chap,  xxxii.  47).  rn^,  to  permit 
oneself  to  be  torn  away  to  idolatry  (as  in  chap.  iv.  19). — ^Ver.  18, 
as  chap.  iv.  26,  viii.  19.  He  calls  upon  heaven  and  earth  as  wit- 
nesses (ver.  19,  as  in  chap.  iv.  26),  namely,  that  he  had  set  before 
them  life  and  death.  IJi^G^S  in  ver.  19,  is  the  apodosis  :  "  therefore 
choose  lifer— Yqv.  20.  "^'^n  t^^in  ^2,  for  that  (namely,  to  love  the 
Lord)  is  thy  life,  that  is,  the  condition  of  life,  and  of  long  life,  in 
the  promised  land  {vid,  chap.  iv.  40). 


rV.— MOSES'  FAREWELL  AND  DEATH. 
Chap,  xxxi.-xxxiv. 

With  the  renewal  of  the  covenant,  by  the  choice  set  before  tjie 
people  between  blessing  and  curse,  life  and  death,  Moses  had 
finished  the  interpretation  and  enforcement  of  the  law  (chap.  i.  5), 
and  brought  the  work  of  legislation  to  a  close.  But  in  order  that 
the  work  to  which  the  Lord  had  called  him  might  be  thoroughly 
completed,  it  still  remained  for  him,  before  his  approaching  death, 
to  hand  over  the  task  of  leading  the  people  into  Canaan  to  Joshua, 
who  had  been  appointed  as  his  successor,  to  finish  writing  out  the 
laws,  and  to  hand  over  the  book  of  the  law  to  the  priests.  The 
Lord  also  directed  him  to  write  an  ode,  as  a  witness  against  the 
people,  on  account  of  their  obstinacy,  and  teach  it  to  the  Israelites. 
To  these  last  arrangements  and  acts  of  Moses,  which  are  narrated 
in  chap.  xxxi.  and  xxxii.,  there  are  added  in  chap,  xxxiii.  the  blessing 
with  which  this  man  of  God  bade  farewell  to  the  tribes  of  Israel,  and 
in  chap,  xxxiv.  the  account  of  his  death,  with  whicli  the  Pentateuch 
closes. 

MOSES'  FINAL  ARRANGEMENTS.      COMPLETION  AND  HANDING  OVER 
OF  THE  BOOK  OF  THE  LAW. — CHAP.  XXXI. 

The  final  arrangements  which  Moses  made  before  his  departure, 
partly  of  his  own  accord,  and  partly  by  the  command  of  God,  relate 
to  the  introduction  of  the  Israelites  into  the  promised  land,  and  the 
confirmation  of  their  fidelity  towards  the  Lord  their  God. — Vers. 
1-13  describe  how  Moses  promised  the  help  of  the  Lord  in  the  con- 
quest of  the  land,  both  to  the  people  generally,  and  also  to  Joshua, 


456  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

their  leader  into  Canaan  (vers.  2-8),  and  commanded  the  priests  to 
keep  the  book  of  the  law,  and  read  it  publicly  every  seventh  year 
(vers.  9-13);  and  vers.  14-23,  how  the  Lord  appeared  to  Moses 
before  the  tabernacle,  and  directed  him  to  compose  an  ode  as  a 
testimony  against  the  apostasy  of  the  people,  and  promised  Joshua 
His  assistance.  And  lastly,  vers.  24-27  relate  how  the  book  of  the 
law,  when  brought  to  completion,  was  handed  over  to  the  Levites  ; 
and  vers.  26-30  describe  the  reading  of  the  ode  to  the  people. 

Vers.  1—8.  In  ver.  1  Moses'  final  arrangements  are  announced. 
"j]J*l  does  not  mean  "  he  went  away"  (into  his  tent),  which  does  not 
tally  with  what  follows  ("  and  spake")  ;  nor  is  it  merely  equivalent 
to  porro,  amplius.  It  serves,  as  in  Ex.  ii.  1  and  Gen.  xxxv.  22,  as 
a  pictorial  description  of  what  he  was  about  to  do,  in  the  sense  of 
"  he  prepared  himself,"  or  rose  up.  After  closing  the  exposition  of 
the  law,  Moses  had  either  withdrawn,  or  at  any  rate  made  a  pause, 
before  he  proceeded  to  make  his  final  arrangements  for  laying  down 
his  office,  and  taking  leave  of  the  people. — Ver.  2.  These  last 
arrangements  he  commences  with  the  declaration,  that  he  must  now 
bid  them  farewell,  as  he  is  120  years  old  (which  agrees  with  Ex.  vii. 
7),  and  can  no  more  go  out  and  in,  i.e,  no  longer  work  in  the  nation 
and  for  it  (see  at  Num.  xxvii.  17)  ;  and  the  Lord  has  forbidden  him 
to  cross  over  the  Jordan  and  enter  Canaan  (see  Num.  xx.  24).  The 
first  of  these  reasons  is  not  at  variance  with  the  statement  in  chap, 
xxxiv.  7,  that  up  to  the  time  of  his  death  his  eyes  were  not  dim,  nor 
his  strength  abated.  For  this  is  merely  an  affirmation,  that  he 
retained  the  ability  to  see  and  to  work  to  the  last  moment  of  his 
life,  which  by  no  means  'precludes  his  noticing  the  decline  of  his 
strength,  and  feeling  the  approach  of  his  death. — Vers.  3-5.  But 
although  Moses  could  not,  and  was  not  to  lead  his  people  into 
Canaan,  the  Lord  would  fulfil  His  promise,  to  go  before  Israel  and 
destroy  the  Canaanites,  like  the  two  kings  of  the  Amorites ;  only 
they  (the  Israelites)  were  to  do  to  them  as  the  Lord  had  commanded 
them,  Le.  to  root  out  the  Canaanites  {yid,  chap.  vii.  2  sqq. ;  Num. 
xxxiii.  51  sqq. ;  Ex.  xxxiv.  11  sqq.). — Ver.  6.  Israel  was  therefore  to 
be  of  good  courage,  and  not  to  be  afraid  of  them  {yid.  chap.  i.  21, 
XX.  3). — Vers.  7,  8.  Moses  then  encourages  Joshua  in  the  same  way 
in  the  presence  of  all  the  people,  on  the  strength  of  the  promise  of 
God  in  chap.  i.  38  and  Num.  xxvii.  18  sqq.  DJ?n"nN  i<nri,  "  thou  wilt 
come  vnth  this  people  into  the  land"  These  words  are  quite  appro- 
priate ;  and  the  alteration  of  t^uri  into  fc^^^JJ,  according  to  ver.  23 
{Samar.j  Syr.,   Vulg,),  is  a  perfectly  unnecessary  conjecture;  for 


I 


CHAP.  XXXI.  9-13.  457 

Joshua  was  not  appointed  leader  of  the  people  here,  but  simply 
promised  an  entrance  with  all  the  people  into  Canaan. 

Vers.  9-13.  Moses  then  handed  over  the  law  which  he  had 
written  to  the  Levitical  priests  who  carried  the  ark  of  the  covenant, 
and  to  all  the  elders  of  Israel,  with  instructions  to  read  it  to  the 
people  at  the  end  of  every  seven  years,  during  the  festal  season  of 
the  year  of  release  ("  at  the  end,"  as  in  chap.  xv.  1),  viz.  at  the  feast 
of  Tabernacles  (see  Lev.  xxiii.  34),  when  they  appeared  before  the 
Lord.  It  is  evident  from  the  context  and  contents  of  these  verses, 
apart  from  ver.  24,  that  the  ninth  verse  is  to  be  understood  in  the 
way  described,  i.e,  that  the  two  clauses,  which  are  connected  to- 
gether by  vav,  relat,  ("  and  Moses  wrote  this  law^''  "'  and  delivered 
it^')y  are  not  logically  co-ordinate,  but  that  the  handing  over  of  the 
written  law  was  the  main  thing  to  be  recorded  here.  With  regard 
to  the  handing  over  of  the  law,  the  fact  that  Moses  not  only  gave 
the  written  law  to  the  priests,  that  they  might  place  it  by  the  ark  of 
the  covenant,  but  also  "  to  all  the  elders  of  Israel,^  proves  clearly 
enough  that  Moses  did  not  intend  at  this  time  to  give  the  law-book 
entirely  out  of  his  own  hands,  but  that  this  handing  over  was 
merely  an  assignment  of  the  law  to  the  persons  who  were  to  take 
care,  that  in  the  future  the  written  law  should  be  kept  before  the 
people,  as  the  rule  of  their  life  and  conduct,  and  publicly  read  ta 
them.  The  explanation  which  J.  H.  Mich,  gives  is  perfectly  correct, 
"  He  gave  it  for  them  to  teach  and  keep."  The  law-book  would 
only  have  been  given  to  the  priests,  if  the  object  had  been  simply 
that  it  should  be  placed  by  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  or  at  the  most, 
in  the  presence  of  the  elders,  but  certainly  not  to  all  the  elders,  since 
they  were  not  allowed  to  touch  the  ark.  The  correctness  of  this 
view  is  placed  beyond  all  doubt  by  the  contents  of  vers.  10  sqq. 
The  main  point  in  hand  was  not  the  writing  out  of  the  law,  or  the 
transfer  of  it  to  the  priests  and  elders  of  the  nation,  but  the  com- 
mand to  read  the  law  in  the  presence  of  the  people  at  the  feast  of 
Tabernacles  of  the  year  of  release.  The  writing  out  and  handing 
over  simply  formed  the  substratum  for  this  command,  so  that  we 
cannot  infer  from  them,  that  by  this  act  Moses  formally  gave  the 
law  out  of  his  own  hands.  He  entrusted  the  reading  to  the  priest- 
hood and  the  college  of  elders,  as  the  spiritual  and  secular  rulers  of 
the  congregation  ;  and  hence  the  singular,  "  Thou  shalt  read  this 
law  to  all  Israel."  The  regulations  as  to  the  persons  who  were  to 
undertake  the  reading,  and  also  as  to  the  particular  time  during  the 
seven  days'  feast,  and  the  portions  that  were  to  be  read,  he  left  to 


458  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  rulers  of  the  congregation.  We  learn  from  Neh.  viii.  18,  that 
in  Ezra's  time  they  read  in  the  book  of  the  law  every  day  from  the 
first  to  the  last  day  of  the  feast,  from  which  we  may  see  on  the  one 
hand,  that  the  whole  of  the  Thorah  (or  Pentateuch),  from  beginning 
to  end,  was  not  read ;  and  on  the  other  hand,  by  comparing  the 
expression  in  ver.  18,  "  the  book  of  the  law  of  God,"  with  "  the 
law,"  in  ver.  14,  that  the  reading  was  not  restricted  to  Deuteronomy : 
for,  according  to  ver.  14,  they  had  already  been  reading  in  Leviticus 
(chap,  xxiii.)  before  the  feast  was  held, — an  evident  proof  that  Ezra 
the  scribe  did  not  regard  the  book  of  Deuteronomy  Hke  the  critics  of 
our  day,  as  the  true  national  law-book,  an  acquaintance  with  which 
was  all  that  the  people  required.  Moses  did  not  fix  upon  the  feast 
of  Tabernacles  of  the  sabbatical  year  as  the  time  for  reading  the 
law,  because  it  fell  at  the  beginning  of  the  year,^  as  Schultz  wrongly 
supposes,  that  the  people  might  thereby  be  incited  to  occupy  this 
year  of  entire  rest  in  holy  employment  with  the  word  and  works  of 
God.  And  the  reading  itself  was  neither  intended  to  promote  a 
more  general  acquaintance  with  the  law  on  the  part  of  the  people, — 
an  object  which  could  not  possibly  have  been  secured  by  reading  it 
once  in  seven  years ;  nor  was  it  merely  to  be  a  solemn  promulgation 
and  restoration  of  the  law  as  the  rule  for  the  national  life,  for  the 
pui'pose  of  removing  any  irregularities  that  might  have  found  their 
way  in  the  course  of  time  into  either  the  religious  or  the  political 
life  of  the  nation  (Bdhr,  Symbol,  ii.  p.  603).  To  answer  this  end, 
it  should  haVe  been  connected  with  the  Passover,  the  festival  of 
Israel's  birth.  The  reading  stood  rather  in  close  connection  with 
the  idea  of  the  festival  itself ;  it  was  intended  to  quicken  the  soul 
with  the  law  of  the  Lord,  to  refresh  the  heart,  to  enlighten  the 
eyes, — in  short,  to  offer  the  congregation  the  blessing  of  the  law, 
which  David  celebrated  from  his  own  experience  in  Ps.  xix.  8-15, 

^  It  by  no  means  follows,  that  because  the  sabbatical  year  commenced  with 
the  omission  of  the  usual  sowing,  i.e.  began  in  the  autumn  with  the  civil  year, 
it  therefore  commenced  with  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  and  the  order  of  the 
feasts  was  reversed  in  the  sabbatical  year.  According  to  Ex.  xxiii.  16,  the  feast 
of  Tabernacles  did  not  fall  at  the  beginning,  but  at  the  end  of  the  civil  year. 
The  commencement  of  the  year  with  the  first  of  Tisri  was  an  arrangement 
introduced  after  the  captivity,  which  the  Jews  had  probably  adopted  from  the 
Syrians  (see  my  hibl.  Archxol.  i.  §  74,  note  15).  Nor  does  it  follow,  that  be- 
cause the  year  of  jubilee  was  to  be  proclaimed  on  the  day  of  atonement  in  the 
sabbatical  year  with  a  blast  of  trumpets  (Lev.  xxv.  9),  therefore  the  year  of 
jubilee  must  have  begun  with  the  feast  of  Tabernacles.  The  proclamation  of 
festivals  is  generally  made  some  time  before  they  commence. 


CHAP.  XXXI.  14-23.  459 

to  make  the  law  beloved  and  prized  by  tlie  whole  nation,  as  a  pre- 
cious gift  of  the  grace  of  God.  Consequently  (vers.  12,  13),.  not 
only  the  men,  but  the  women  and  children  also,  were  to  be  gathered 
together  for  this  purpose,  that  they  might  hear  the  word  of  God, 
and  learn  to  fear  the  Lord  their  God,  as  long  as  they  should  live  in 
the  land  which  He  gave  them  for  a  possession.  On  ver.  11,  see  Ex. 
xxiii.  17,  and  xxxiv.  23,  24,  where  we  also  find  ^^^"Jr?  for  ^i^^"}"?.!? 
(ver.  24). 

Vers.  14-23.  After  handing  over  the  office  to  Joshua,  and  the 
law  to  the  priests  and  elders,  Moses  was  called  by  the  Lord  to 
come  to  the  tabernacle  with  Joshua,  to  command  him  ("^JV),  i.e, 
to  appoint  him,  confirm  him  in  his  office.  To  this  end  the  Lord 
appeared  in  the  tabernacle  (ver.  15),  in  a  pillar  of  cloud,  which 
remained  standing  before  it,  as  in  Num.  xii.  5  (see  the  exposition 
of  Num.  xi.  25).  But  before  appointing  Joshua,  He  announced 
to  Moses  that  after  his  death  the  nation  would  go  a  whoring  after 
other  gods,  and  would  break  the  covenant,  for  which  it  would  be 
visited  with  severe  afflictions,  and  directed  him  to  write  an  ode  and 
teach  it  to  the  children  of  Israel,  that  when  the  apostasy  should 
take  place,  and  punishment  from  God  be  felt  in  consequence,  it 
might  speak  as  a  witness  against  the  people,  as  it  would  not  vanish 
from  their  memory.  The  Lord  communicated  this  commission  to 
Moses  in  the  presence  of  Joshua,  that  he  also  might  hear  from  the 
mouth  of  God  that  the  Lord  foreknew  the  future  apostasy  of  the 
people,  and  yet  nevertheless  would  bring  them  into  the  promised 
land.  In  this  there  was  also  implied  an  admonition  to  Joshua,  not 
only  to  take  care  that  the  Israelites  learned  the  ode  and  kept  it  in 
their  memories,  but  also  to  strive  with  all  his  might  to  prevent  the 
apostasy,  so  long  as  he  was  leader  of  Israel ;  which  Joshua  did  most 
faithfully  to  the  very  end  of  his  life  (vid.  Josh,  xxiii.  and  xxiv.). — 
The  announcement  of  the  falling  away  of  the  Israelites  from  the 
Lord  into  idolatry,  and  the  burning  of  the  wrath  of  God  in  con- 
sequence (vers.  16-18),  serves  as  a  basis  for  the  command  in  vers. 
19  sqq.  In  this  announcement  the  different  points  are  simply 
linked  together  with  "  and,"  whereas  in  their  actual  signification 
they  are  subordinate  to  one  another :  When  thou  shalt  lie  with  thy 
fathers,  and  the  people  shall  rise  up,  and  go  a  whoring  after  other 
gods :  My  anger  will  burn  against  them,  etc.  Dip,  to  rise  up,  to 
prepare,  serves  to  bring  out  distinctly  the  course  which  the  thing 
would  take.  The  expression,  '\foreign  gods  of  the  land^^  indicates 
that  in  the  land  which  Jehovah  gave  His  people,  He  (Jehovah) 


460  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


sliippe™ 


alone  was  God  and  Lord,  and  that  He  alone  was  to  be  worshippec 
there,  ^^"li?^  is  in  apposition  to  n^K^^  "  wldther  tliou  coinest,  in  the 
midst  of  itr  The  punishment  announced  in  ver.  17  corresponds 
most  closely  to  the  sin  of  the  nation.  For  going  a  whoring  after 
strange  gods,  the  anger  of  the  Lord  would  burn  against  them ;  for 
forsaking  Him,  He  would  forsake  them;  and  for  breaking  His 
covenant,  He  would  hide  Plis  face  from  them,  i.e.  withdraw  His 
favour  from  them,  so  that  they  would  be  destroyed.  PbN7  \X^T\^  it 
(the  nation)  will  be  for  devouring,  i.e.  will  be  devoured  or  destroyed 
(see  Ewald,  §  237,  c;  and  on  /'^^5  in  this  sense,  see  chap.  vii.  16, 
and  Num.  xiv.  9).  '^And  many  evils  and  troubles  will  befall  it; 
and  it  loill  say  in  that  day.  Do  not  these  evils  befall  me,  because  my 
God  is  not  in  the  midst  of  meV^  When  the  evils  and  troubles 
broke  in  upon  the  nation,  the  people  would  inquire  the  cause,  and 
would  find  it  in  the  fact  that  they  were  forsaken  by  their  God ; 
but  the  Lord  ("  but  I "  in  ver.  18  forms  the  antithesis  to  "  they  " 
in  ver.  17)  would  still  hide  His  face,  namely,  because  simply  miss- 
ing God  is  not  true  repentance. — Ver.  19.  ''And  now^'  sc.  because 
what  was  ani;iounced  in  vers.  16-18  would  take  place,  ''write  you 
this  songP  "This"  refers  to  the  song  which  follows  in  chap,  xxxii. 
Moses  and  Joshua  were  to  write  the  song,  because  they  were  both 
of  them  to  strive  to  prevent  the  apostasy  of  the  people ;  and  Moses, 
as  the  author,  was  to  teach  it  to  the  children  of  Israel,  to  make 
them  learn  it,  that  it  might  be  a  witness  for  the  Lord  (for  Me) 
against  the  children  of  Israel.  "  This "  is  defined  still  further  in 
vers.  20,  21:  if  Israel,  through  growing  satisfied  and  fat  in  its  land, 
which  was  so  rich  in  costly  good,  should  turn  to  other  gods,  and 
the  Lord  should  visit  it  in  consequence  with  grievous  evils  and 
troubles,  the  song  was  to  answer  before  Israel  as  a  witness  ;  i.e.  not 
only  serve  the  Lord  as  a  witness  to  the  people  that  He  had  foretold 
all  the  evil  consequences  of  apostasy,  and  had  given  Israel  proper 
warning  (Knobel),  but  to  serve,  as  we  may  see  from  vers.  20,  21, 
and  from  the  contents  of  the  song,  as  a  witness,  on  the  one  hand, 
that  the  Lord  had  conferred  upon  the  people  so  many  benefits  and 
bestowed  upon  them  such  abundant  blessings  of  His  grace,  that 
apostasy  from  Him  was  the  basest  ingratitude,  for  which  they 
would  justly  be  punished ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  that  the  Lord 
had  not  rejected  His  people  in  spite  of  the  punishments  inflicted 
upon  them,  but  would  once  more  have  compassion  upon  them  and 
requite  their  foes,  and  thus  would  sanctify  and  glorify  Himself  as 
the  only  true  God  by  His  judgments  upon  Israel  and  the  nations. 


I 


CHAP.  XXXI.  24-27.  461 

The  law,  with  its  commandments,  promises,  and  threats,  was  ah'eady 
a  witness  of  this  kind  against  Israel  (cf.  ver.  26) ;  but  just  as  in 
every  other  instance  the  appearance  of  a  plurality  of  unanimous 
witnesses  raises  the  matter  into  an  indisputable  truth,  so  the  Lord 
would  set  up  another  witness  against  the  Israelites  besides  the  law, 
in  the  form  of  this  song,  which  was  adapted  to  give  all  the  louder 
warning,  "  because  the  song  would  not  be  forgotten  out  of  the 
mouths  of  their  seed"  (ver.  21).  The  song,  when  once  it  had 
passed  into  the  mouths  of  the  people,  would  not  very  readily  vanish 
from  their  memory,  but  would  be  transmitted  from  generation  to 
generation,  and  be  heard  from  the  mouths  of  their  descendants,  as 
a  perpetual  warning  voice,  as  it  would  be  used  by  Israel ;  for  God 
knew  the  invention  of  the  people,  i.e.  the  thoughts  and  purposes  of 
their  heart,  which  they  cherished  (p^V  used  to  denote  the  doing  of 
the  heart,  as  in  Isa.  xxxii.  6)  even  then  before  He  had  brought 
them  into  Canaan.  (On  ver.  20a,  vid.  chap.  vii.  5,  ix.  5,  and  Ex. 
iii.  8.) — In  ver.  22  the  result  is  anticipated,  and  the  command  of 
God  is  followed  immediately  by  an  account  of  its  completion  by 
Moses  (just  as  in  Ex.  xii.  50 ;  Lev.  xvi.  34,  etc.). — After  this  com- 
mand with  reference  to  the  song,  the  Lord  appointed  Joshua  to  the 
office  which  he  had  been  commanded  to  take,  urging  him  at  the 
same  time  to  be  courageous,  and  promising  him  His  help  in  the 
conquest  of  Canaan.  That  the  subject  to  1^)1  is  not  Moses,  but 
Jehovah,  is  evident  partly  from  the  context,  the  retrospective  glance 
at  ver.  14,  and  partly  from  the  words  themselves,  "  I  will  be  with 
thee"  (m^.  Ex.  iii.  12).^ 

Vers.  24-27.  With  the  installation  of  Joshua  on  the  part  of 
God,  the  official  life  of  Moses  was  brought  to  a  close.  Having 
returned  from  the  tabernacle,  he  finished  the  writing  out  o:i;the 
laws,  and  then  gave  the  book  of  the  law  to  the  Levites,  with  aaV)m- 
mand  to  put  it  by  the  side  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  that  it  might 
be  there  for  a  witness  against  the  people,  as  He  knew  its  rebellion 
and  stiffneckedness  (vers.  24-27).  "^^P'^V  3n3,  to  write  upon  a 
book,  equivalent  to  write  down,  commit  to  writing.  DK)ri  1^^  till 
their  being  finished,  i.e.  complete.  By  the  ^'Levites  who  bare  the  ark 
of  the  covenant'^  we  are  not  to  understand  ordinary  Levites,  but  the 

1  KnobeVs  assertion  (on  Num.  xxvii.  23)  that  the  appointment  of  Joshua  on 
the  part  of  Moses  by  the  imposition  of  hands,  as  described  in  that  passage,  is  at 
variance  with  this  verse,  scarcely  needs  any  refutation.  Or  is  it  really  the  case, 
that  the  installation  of  Joshua  on  the  part  of  God  is  irreconcilable  with  his 
ordination  by  Moses  ? 


462  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Levitical  priests,  who  were  entrusted  with  the  ark.  "The  Levites" 
is  simply  a  contraction  for  the  full  expression,  "  the  priests  the 
sons  of  Levi "  (ver.  9).  It  is  true  that,  according  to  Num.  iv.  4 
sqq.,  the  Kohathites  were  appointed  to  carry  the  holy  vessels,  which 
included  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  on  the  journey  through  the  desert; 
but  it  was  the  priests,  and  not  they,  who  were  the  true  bearers  and 
guardians  of  the  holy  things,  as  we  may  see  from  the  fact  that  the 
priests  had  first  of  all  to  wrap  up  these  holy  things  in  a  careful 
manner,  before  they  handed  them  over  to  the  Kohathites,  that  they 
might  not  touch  the  holy  things  and  die  (Num.  iv.  15).  Hence 
we  find  that  on  solemn  occasions,  when  the  ark  was  to  be  brought 
out  in  all  its  full  significance  and  glory, — as,  for  example,  in  the 
crossing  of  the  Jordan  (Josh.  iii.  3  sqq.,  iv.  9,  10),  when  encom- 
passing Jericho  (Josh.  vi.  6,  12),  at  the  setting  up  of  the  law  on 
Ebal  and  Gerizim  (Josh.  viii.  33),  and  at  the  consecration  of 
Solomon's  temple  (1  Kings  viii.  3), — it  was  not  by  the  Levites,  but 
by  the  priests,  that  the  ark  of  the  covenant  was  borne.  In  fact 
the  Levites  were,  strictly  speaking,  only  their  (the  priests')  servants, 
who  relieved  them  of  this  and  the  other  labour,  so  that  what  they 
did  was  done  in  a  certain  sense  through  them.  If  the  (non- 
priestly)  Levites  were  not  to  touch  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  and 
not  even  to  put  in  the  poles  (Num.  iv.  6),  Moses  would  not  have 
handed  over  the  law-book,  to  be  kept  by  the  ark  of  the  covenant, 
to  them,  but  to  the  priests.  |i">fe<  ^^,  at  the  side  of  the  ark,  or, 
according  to  the  paraphrase  of  Jonathan,  "  in  a  case  on  the  right 
side  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant,"  which  may  be  correct,  although 
we  must  not  think  of  this  case,  as  many  of  the  early  theologians 
do,  as  a  secondary  ark  attached  to  the  ark  of  the  covenant  (see 
Luiv^ius,  Jud,  Heiligth.  pp.  73,  74).  The  tables  of  the  law  were 
dep  ?ited  in  the  ark  (Ex.  xxv.  16,  xl.  20),  and  the  book  of  the  law 
was  to  be  kept  by  its  side.  As  it  formed,  from  its  very  nature, 
simply  an  elaborate  commentary  upon  the  decalogue,  it  was  also  to 
have  its  place  outwardly  as  an  accompaniment  to  the  tables  of  the 
law,  for  a  witness  against  the  people,  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
song  in  the  mouth  of  the  people  (ver.  21).  For,  as  Moses  adds  in 
ver.  27,  in  explanation  of  his  instructions,  '^ I  know  thy  rebelliousness, 
and  thy  stiff  nech  :  behold,  while  I  am  yet  alive  with  you  this  day,  ye 
have  been  rebellious  against  the  Lord  (vid.  chap.  ix.  7) ;  and  hoiv 
much  more  after  my  deathP 

With  these  words  Moses  handed  over  the  complete  book  of  the 
law  to  the  Levitical  priests.     For  although  the  handing  over  is  not 


I 


CHAP.  XXXI.  28-30.  463 

expressly  mentioned,  it  is  unquestionably  implied  in  the  words, 
"  Take  this  book,  and  put  it  by  the  side  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant," 
as  the  finishing  of  the  writing  of  the  laws  is  mentioned  immediately 
before.  But  if  Moses  finished  the  writino;  of  the  law  after  he  had 
received  instructions  from  the  Lord  to  compose  the  ode,  what  he 
wrote  will  reach  to  ver.  23  ;  and  what  follows  from  ver.  24  onwards 
will  form  the  appendix  to  his  work  by  a  different  hand.^  The  sup- 
position that  Moses  himself  inserted  his  instructions  concerning  the 
preservation  of  the  book  of  the  law,  and  the  ode  which  follows,  is 
certainly  possible,  but  not  probable.  The  decision  as  to  the  place 
where  it  should  be  kept  was  not  of  such  importance  as  to  need 
insertion  in  the  book  of  the  law,  since  sufficient  provision  for  its 
safe  keeping  had  been  made  by  the  directions  in  vers.  9  sqq. ;  and 
although  God  had  commanded  him  to  write  the  ode,  it  was  not  for 
the  purpose  of  inserting  it  in  the  Thorah  as  an  essential  portion  of  it, 
but  to  let  the  people  learn  it,  to  put  it  in  the  mouth  of  the  people. 
The  allusion  to  this  ode  in  vers.  19  sqq.  furnishes  no  conclusive  evi- 
dence, either  that  Moses  himself  included  it  in  the  law-book  which 
he  had  written  with  the  account  of  his  oration  in  vers.  28-30  and 
chap,  xxxii.  1-43,  or  that  the  appendix  which  Moses  did  not  write 
commences  at  ver.  14  of  this  chapter.  For  all  that  follows  with 
certainty  from  the  expression  "this  song"  (vers.  19  and  22),  which 
certainly  points  to  the  song  in  chap,  xxxii.,  is  that  Moses  himself 
handed  over  the  ode  to  the  priests  with  the  complete  book  of  the 
law,  as  a  supplement  to  the  law,  and  that  this  ode  was  then  inserted 
by  the  writer  of  the  appendix  in  the  appendix  itself. 

Yers.  28-30.  Directly  after  handing  over  the  book  of  the  law, 
Moses  directed  the  elders  of  all  the  tribes,  together  with  the  official 
persons,  to  .gather  round  him,  that  he  might  rehearse  to  them  the 
ode  which  he  had  written  for  the  people.  The  summons,  "  gather 
unto  me,"  was  addressed  to  the  persons  to  whom  he  had  given  the 
book  of  the  law.  The  elders  and  officers,  as  the  civil  authorities  of  the 
congregation,  were  collected  together  by  him  to  hear  the  ode,  because 
they  were  to  put  it  in  the  mouth  of  the  people,  i.e.  to  take  care  that 

^  The  objection  brought  against  this  view  by  Riehm^  namely,  that  *'it 
founders  on  the  fact  that  the  style  and  language  in  chap.  xxxi.  24-30  and 
xxxii.  44-47  are  just  the  same  as  in  the  earlier  portion  of  the  book,"  simply 
shows  that  he  has  not  taken  into  consideration  that,  with  the  simple  style 
adopted  in  Hebrew  narrative,  we  could  hardly  expect  in  eleven  verses,  which 
contain  for  the  most  part  simply  words  and  sayings  of  Moses,  to  find  any  very 
striking  difference  of  language  or  of  style.  This  objection,  therefore,  merely 
proves  that  no  valid  arguments  can  be  adduced  against  the  view  in  question. 


464  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

all  the  nation  should  learn  it.  The  words,  "  /  will  call  heaven  and 
earth  as  tvitnesses  against  you^^  refer  to  the  substance  of  tlie  ode 
about  to  be  rehearsed,  which  begins  with  an  appeal  to  the  lieaven 
and  the  earth  (chap,  xxxii.  1).  The  reason  assigned  for  this  in 
ver.  29  is  a  brief  summary  of  what  the  Lord  had  said  to  Moses  in 
vers.  16—21,  and  Moses  thought  it  necessary  to  communicate  to  the 
representatives  of  the  nation.  "  The  work  of  your  hands^*  refers  to 
the  idols  (vid.  chap.  iv.  28). — ^Ver.  30  forms  the  introduction  to  the 
rehearsal  of  the  ode. 


CHAP.  XXXII. 


J 


Vers.  1-43.  The  Song  of  Moses. — In  accordance  with  the 
object  announced  in  chap.  xxxi.  19,  this  song  contrasts  the  un- 
changeable fidelity  of  the  Lord  with  the  perversity  of  His  faithless 
people.  After  a  solemn  introduction  pointing  out  the  importance  of 
the  instruction  about  to  be  given  (vers.  1-3),  this  thought  is  placed 
in  the  foreground  as  the  theme  of  the  whole  :  the  Lord  is  blameless 
and  righteous  in  His  doings,  but  Israel  acts  corruptly  and  per- 
versely ;  and  this  is  carried  out  in  the  first  place  by  showing  the 
folly  of  the  Israelites  in  rebelling  against  the  Lord  (vers.  6-18) ; 
secondly,  by  unfolding  the  purpose  of  God  to  reject  and  punish  the 
rebellious  generation  (vers.  19-23) ;  and  lastly,  by  announcing  and 
depicting  the  fulfilment  of  this  purpose,  and  the  judgment  in  which 
the  Lord  would  have  mercy  upon  His  servants  and  annihilate  His 
foes  (vers.  34-43). 

The  song  embraces  the  whole  of  the  future  history  of  Israel, 
and  bears  all  the  marks  of  a  prophetic  testimony  from  the  mouth 
of  Moses,  in  the  perfectly  ideal  picture  which  it  draws,  on  the  one 
hand,  of  the  benefits  and  blessings  conferred  by  the  Lord  upon  His 
people ;  and  on  the  other  hand,  of  the  ingratitude  with  which  Israel 
repaid  its  God  for  them  all.  "  This  song,  soaring  as  it  does  to  the 
loftiest  heights,  moving  amidst  the  richest  abundance  of  pictures  of 
both  present  and  future,  with  its  concise,  compressed,  and  pictorial 
style,  rough,  penetrating,  and  sharp,  but  full  of  the  holiest  solem- 
nity, a  witness  against  the  disobedient  nation,  a  celebration  of  the 
covenant  God,  sets  before  us  in  miniature  a  picture  of  the  whole 
life  and  conduct  of  the  great  man  of  God,  whose  office  it  pre-emi- 
nently was  to  preach  condemnation"  (0.  v,  Gerlach). — It  is  true 
that  the  persons  addressed  in  this  ode  are  not  the  contemporaries  of 


I 


CHAP.  XXXIL  1-43.  465 

Moses,  but  the  Israelites  in  Canaan,  when  they  had  grown  haughty 
in  the  midst  of  the  rich  abundance  of  its  blessings,  and  had  fallen 
away  from  the  Lord,  so  that  the  times  when  God  led  the  people 
through  the  wilderness  to  Canaan  are  represented  as  days  long  past 
away.  But  this,  the  stand-point  of  the  ode,  is  not  to  be  identified 
with  the  poet's  own  time.  It  is  rather  a  prophetic  anticipation  of 
the  future,  which  has  an  analogon  in  a  poet's  absorption  in  an  ideal 
future,  and  differs  from  this  merely  in  the  certainty  and  distinct- 
ness with  which  the  future  is  foreseen  and  proclaimed.  The  asser- 
tion that  the  entire  ode  moves  within  the  epoch  of  the  kings  who 
lived  many  centuries  after  the  time  of  Moses,  rests  upon  a  total 
misapprehension  of  the  nature  of  prophecy,  and  a  mistaken  attempt 
to  turn  figurative  language  into  prosaic  history.  In  the  whole  of 
the  song  there  is  not  a  single  word  to  indicate  that  the  persons  ad- 
dressed were  "  already  sighing  under  the  oppression  of  a  wild  and 
hostile  people,  the  barbarous  hordes  of  Assyrians  or  Chaldeans" 
(Ewald,  Kamphausen,  etc.).^  The  Lord  had  indeed  determined  to 
reject  the  idolatrous  nation,  and  excite  it  to  jealousy  through  those 
that  were  "no  people,"  and  to  heap  up  all  evils  upon  it,  famine, 
pestilence,  and  sword ;  but  the  execution  of  this  purpose  had  not 
yet  taken  place,  and,  although  absolutely  certain,  was  in  the  future 
still.  Moreover,  the  benefits  which  God  had  conferred  upon  His 
people,  were  not  of  such  a  character  as  to  render  it  impossible  that 
they  should  have  been  alluded  to  by  Moses.  All  that  the  Lord  had 
done  for  Israel,  by  delivering  it  from  bondage  and  guiding  it  miracu- 
lously through  the  wilderness,  had  been  already  witnessed  by  Moses 
himself ;  and  the  description  in  vers.  13  and  14,  which  goes  beyond 
that  time,  is  in  reality  nothing  more  than  a  pictorial  expansion  of 
the  thought  that  Israel  was  most  bountifully  provided  with  the 

»  How  little  firm  ground  there  is  for  this  assertion  in  the  contents  of  the 
ode,  is  indirectly  admitted  even  by  Kampliaiisen  himself  in  the  following  re- 
marks :  "  The  words  of  the  ode  leave  us  quite  in  the  dark  as  to  the  author ;" 
and  "  if  it  were  really  certain  that  Deuteronomy  was  composed  by  Moses  him- 
self, the  question  as  to  the  authenticity  of  the  ode  would  naturally  be  decided  in 
the  traditional  way."  Consequently,  the  solution  of  the  whole  is  to  be  found 
in  the  dictum,  that  "the  circumstances  which  are  assumed  in  any  prophecy  as 
already  existing,  and  to  which  the  prophetic  utterances  are  appended  as  to 
something  well  known  (?),  really  determine  the  time  of  the  prophet  himself;" 
and,  according  to  this  canon,  which  is  held  up  as  "  certain  and  infallible,"  but 
which  is  really  thoroughly  uncritical,  and  founded  upon  the  purely  dogmatic 
assumption  that  any  actual  foreknowledge  of  the  future  is  impossible,  the  ode 
before  us  is  to  be  assigned  to  a  date  somewhere  about  700  years  before  GhrLst. 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  2  G 


466  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

richest  productions  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  which  flowed  with  milk 
and  honey.  It  is  true,  the  satisfaction  of  Israel  with  these  blessings 
had  not  actually  taken  place  in  the  time  of  Moses,  but  was  still  only 
an  object  of  hope ;  but  it  was  hope  of  such  a  kind,  that  Moses  could 
not  cherish  a  moment's  doubt  concerning  it.  Throughout  the  whole 
we  find  no  allusions  to  peculiar  circumstances  or  historical  events 
belonging  to  a  later  age. — On  the  other  hand,  the  whole  circle  of 
ideas,  figures,  and  words  in  the  ode  points  decidedly  to  Moses  as  the 
author.  Even  if  we  leave  out  of  sight  the  number  of  peculiarities 
of  style  {air.  Xejofieva),  which  is  by  no  means  inconsiderable,  and 
such  bold  original  composite  words  as  p^'^^p  (not-God,  ver.  21; 
of.  ver.  17)  and  UV~i6  (not-people,  ver.  21),  which  point  to  a  very 
remote  antiquity,  and  furnish  evidence  of  the  vigour  of  the  earliest 
poetry, — the  figure  of  the  eagle  in  ver.  11  points  back  to  Ex.  xix.  4  ; 
the  description  of  God  as  a  rock  in  vers.  4, 15,  18,  30,  31,  37,  recalls 
Gen.  xlix.  24  ;  the  Jire  of  the  wrath  of  God,  burning  even  to  the 
w^orld  beneath  (ver.  22),  points  to  the  representation  of  God  in  chap. 
iv.  24  as  a  consuming  fire ;  the  expression  "  to  move  to  jealousy^'* 
in  vers.  16  and  21,  recalls  the  "jealous  God"  in  chap.  iv.  24,  vi. 
1 5,  Ex.  XX.  5,  xxxiv.  14 ;  the  description  of  Israel  as  children  (sons) 
in  ver.  5,  and  "children  without  faithfulness"  in  ver.  20,  suggests 
chap.  xiv.  1  ;  and  the  words,  "  O  that  they  were  wise^''*  in  ver.  29, 
recall  chap.  iv.  6,  "  a  wise  people."  Again,  it  is  only  in  the  Penta- 
teuch that  the  word  Ha  {greatness,  ver.  3)  is  used  to  denote  the 
greatness  of  God  {vid,  Deut.  iii.  24,  v.  21,  ix.  26,  xi.  2  ;  Num.  xiv. 
19) ;  the  name  of  honour  given  to  Israel  in  ver.  15,  viz.  Jeshurun, 
only  occurs  again  in  chap,  xxxiii.  5  and  26,  with  the  exception  of 
Isa.  xliv.  2,  where  it  is  borrowed  from  these  passages ;  and  the 
plural  form  DiD"!,  in  ver.  7,  is  only  met  with  again  in  the  prayer  of 
Moses,  viz.  Ps.  xc.  15. 

Vers.  1—5.  Introduction  and  Theme. — In  the  introduction  (vers. 
1—3), — "  Give  ear,  0  ye  heavens,  I  will  speak;  and  let  the  earth  hear  the 
words  of  my  mouth.  Let  my  doctrine  drop  as  the  rain,  let  my  speech 
fall  as  the  dew ;  as  showers  upon  green,  and  rain-drops  upon  herb  : 
for  1  will  publish  the  name  of  the  Lord ;  give  ye  greatness  to  our 
God^^ — ^Moses  summons  heaven  and  earth  to  hearken  to  his  words, 
because  the  instruction  which  he  was  about  to  proclaim  concerned 
both  heaven  and  earth,  i.e.  the  whole  universe.  It  did  so,  however, 
not  merely  as  treating  of  the  honour  of  its  Creator,  which  was  dis- 
regarded by  the  murmuring  people  {Kamphausen),  or  to  justify  God, 
as  the  witness  of  the  righteousness  of  His  doings,  in  opposition  to 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43.  467 

the  faithless  nation,  when  He  punished  it  for  its  apostasy  (just  as  in 
chap.  iv.  26,  xxx.  19,  xxxi.  28,  29,  heaven  and  earth  are  appealed  to 
as  witnesses  against  rebellious  Israel),  but  also  inasmuch  as  heaven 
and  earth  would  be  affected  by  the  judgment  which  God  poured 
out  upon  faithless  Israel  and  the  nations,  to  avenge  the  blood  of 
His  servants  (ver.  43)  ;  since  the  faithfulness  and  righteousness  of 
God  would  thus  become  manifest  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  and  the 
universe  be  sanctified  and  glorified  thereby.  The  vav  consec.  before 
•^"^r?"^^  expresses  the  desired  or  intended  sequel :  so  that  I  may  then 
speak,  or  "  so  will  I  then  speak"  (vid,  Kohler  on  Hogg,  p.  44,  note) 
— Ver.  2.  But  because  what  was  about  to  be  announced  w^as  of  such 
importance  throughout,  he  desired  that  the  words  should  trickle 
down  like  rain  and  dew  upon  grass  and  herb.  The  point  of  com- 
parison lies  in  the  refreshing,  fertilizing,  and  enlivening  power  of 
the  dew  and  rain.  Might  the  song  exert  the  same  upon  the  hearts 
of  the  hearers.  Hj??,  accepting,  then,  in  a  passive  sense,  that  which 
is  accepted,  instruction  (doctrine,  Prov.  xvi.  21,  23 ;  Isa.  xxix.  24). 
To  '^ publish  the  name  of  the  Lord :"  lit.  call,  i.e.  proclaim  (not  "  call 
upon"),  or  praise.  It  was  not  by  himself  alone  that  Moses  desired 
to  praise  the  name  of  the  Lord ;  the  hearers  of  his  song  were  also 
to  join  in  this  praise.  The  second  clause  requires  this :  "  give  ye 
(i.e.  ascribe  by  word  and  conduct)  greatness  to  our  God^  P'li,  ap- 
plied here  to  God  (as  in  chap.  iii.  24,  v.  21,  ix.  26,  xi.  2),  which  is 
only  repeated  again  in  Ps.  cl.  2,  is  the  greatness  manifested  by  God 
in  His  acts  of  omnipotence ;  it  is  similar  in  meaning  to  the  term 
"  glory"  in  Ps.  xxix.  1,  2,  xcvi.  7,  8. 

Vers.  4,  5.  "  The  Roch — blameless  is  His  work;  for  all  His 
ways  are  right :  a  God  of  faithfulness j  and  without  injustice ;  just 
and  righteous  is  He.  Corruptly  acts  towards  Him,  not  His  children ; 
their  spot,  a  perverse  and  crooked  generation^  ">^2fn  is  placed  first 
absolutely,  to  give  it  the  greater  prominence.  God  is  called  "  the 
rock,"  as  the  unchangeable  refuge,  who  grants  a  firm  defence  and 
secure  resort  to  His  people,  by  virtue  of  His  unchangeableness  or 
impregnable  firmness  (see  the  synonym,  "  the  Stone  of  Israel,"  in 
Gen.  xlix.  24).  This  epithet  points  to  the  Mosaic  age  ;  and  this  is 
clearly  shown  by  the  use  made  of  this  title  of  God  {Zur)  in  the 
construction  of  surnames  in  the  Mosaic  era ;  such,  for  example,  as 
Pedahzur  (Num.  i.  10),  which  is  equivalent  to  Pedahel  ("  God 
redeemed,"  Num.  xxxiv.  28),  Elizur  (Num.  i.  5),  Zuriel  (Num.  iii. 
35),  and  Zurishaddai  (Num.  i.  6,  ii.  12).  David,  who  had  so  often 
experienced  the  rock-like  protection  of  his  God,  adopted  it  in  his 


468  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Psalms  (2  Sam.  xxii.  3,  32  =  Ps.  xviii.  3,  32 ;  also  Ps.  xlx.  15,  xxxi. 
3,  4,  Ixxi.  3).  Perfect  {i.e.  blameless,  without  fault  or  blemish)  is  His 
work ;  for  His  ways,  which  He  adopts  in  His  government  of  the 
world,  are  right.  As  the  rock.  He  is  "  a  God  of  faithfulness," 
upon  which  men  may  rely  and  build  in  all  the  storms  of  life,  and 
"  without  iniquity,"  i.e.  anything  crooked  or  false  in  His  nature. — 
Ver.  5.  His  people  Israel,  on  the  contrary,  had  acted  corruptly 
tow^ards  Him.  The  subject  of  "  acted  corruptly"  is  the  rebellious 
generation  of  the  people ;  but  before  this  subject  there  is  introduced 
parenthetically,  and  in  apposition,  "  not  his  children,  but  their  spot." 
Spot  (mum)  is  used  here  in  a  moral  sense,  as  in  Prov.  ix.  7,  Job  xi. 
15,  xxxi.  7,  equivalent  to  stain.  The  rebellious  and  ungodly  were 
not  children  of  the  Lord,  but  a  stain  upon  them.  If  these  words 
had  stood  after  the  actual  subject,  instead  of  before  them,  they 
would  have  presented  no  difficulty.  This  verse  is  the  original  of  the 
expression,  "  children  that  are  corrupters,"  in  Isa.  i.  4. 

Vers.  6-18.  Expansion  of  the  theme  according  to  the  thought 
expressed  in  ver.  5.  The  perversity  of  the  rebellious  generation 
manifested  itself  in  the  fact,  that  it  repaid  the  Lord,  to  whom  it 
owed  existence  and  well-being,  for  all  His  benefits,  with  a  foolish 
apostasy  from  its  Creator  and  Father.  This  thought  is  expressed 
in  ver.  6,  in  a  reproachful  question  addressed  to  the  people,  and  then 
supported  in  vers.  7-14  by  an  enumeration  of  the  benefits  conferred 
by  God,  and  in  vers.  15-18  by  a  description  of  the  ingratitude  of 
the  people. — Ver.  6.  "  Will  ye  thus  repay  the  Lord  ?  thou  foolish 
people  and  unwise  !  Is  He  not  thy  Father j  who  hath  founded  thee, 
who  hath  made  thee  and  prepared  thee  ?"  7D3,  the  primary  idea  of 
which  is  doubtful,  signifies  properly  to  show,  or  do,  for  the  most  part 
good,  but  sometimes  evil  (vid.  Ps.  vii.  5).  For  the  purpose  of  paint- 
ing the  folly  of  their  apostasy  distinctly  before  the  eyes  of  the 
people,  Moses  crowds  words  together  to  describe  what  God  was  to 
the  nation, — "  thy  Father,^^  to  whose  love  Israel  was  indebted  for  its 
elevation  into  an  independent  people :  comp.  Isa.  Ixiii.  16,  where 
Father  and  Redeemer  are  synonymous  terms,  with  Isa.  Ixiv.  7,  God 
the  Father,  Israel  the  clay  which  He  had  formed,  and  Mai.  ii.  10, 
where  God  as  Father  is  said  to  have  created  Israel ;  see  also  the 
remarks  at  chap.  xiv.  1  on  the  notion  of  Israel's  sonship. — ^^?^,  He 
has  acquired  thee ;  njp^  KrdaOac,  to  get,  acquire  (Gen.  iv.  1),  then  so 
as  to  involve  the  idea  of  tcrl^ei^v  (Gen.  xiv.  9),  though  without  being 
identical  with  i^'^3.  It  denotes  here  the  foundins;  of  Israel  as  a  nation, 
by  its  deliverance  out  of  the  power  of  Pharaoh.     The  verbs  which 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43.  469 

follow  {made  and  established)  refer  to  the  elevation  and  prepara- 
tion of  the  redeemed  nation,  as  the  nation  of  the  Lord,  by  the  con- 
clusion of  a  covenant,  the  giving  of  the  law,  and  their  guidance 
through  the  desert. — ^Yer.  7.  "  Remember  the  days  of  old,  consider 
the  years  of  the  past  generations  :  ask  thy  father,  that  he  may  make 
known  to  thee ;  thine  old  men,  that  they  may  tell  it  to  thee!"  With 
these  words  Moses  summons  the  people  to  reflect  upon  what  the 
Lord  had  done  to  them.  The  days  of  old  (p^'^V),  and  years  of  gene- 
ration and  generation,  i.e.  years  through  which  one  generation  after 
another  had  lived,  are  the  times  of  the  deliverance  of  Israel  out 
of  Egypt,  including  the  pre-Mosaic  times,  and  also  the  immediate 
post-Mosaic,  when  Israel  had  entered  into  the  possession  of  Canaan. 
These  times  are  described  by  Moses  as  a  far  distant  past,  because 
he  transported  himself  in  spirit  to  the  "  latter  days"  (chap.  xxxi. 
29),  when  the  nation  would  have  fallen  away  from  its  God,  and 
would  have  been  forsaken  and  punished  by  God  in  consequence. 
"  Days  of  eternity''  are  times  which  lie  an  eternity  behind  the 
speaker,  not  necessarily,  however,  before  all  time,  but  simply  at  a 
period  very  far  removed  from  the  present,  and  of  which  even  the 
fathers  and  old  men  could  only  relate  what  had  been  handed  down 
by  tradition  to  them. 

Vers.  8  and  9.  "  When  the  Most  High  portioned  out  inheritance 
to  the  nations,  when  He  divided  the  children  of  men;  He  fixed  the 
boundaries  of  the  nations  according  to  the  number  of  the  so7is  of 
Israel :  for  the  Lord^s  portion  is  His  people ;  Jacob  the  cord  of  His 
inheritance"  Moses  commences  his  enumeration  of  the  manifesta- 
tions of  divine  mercy  with  the  thought,  that  from  the  very  com- 
mencement of  the  forming  of  nations  God  had  cared  for  His  people 
Israel.  The  meaning  of  ver.  8  is  given  in  general  correctly  by 
Calvin:  "In  the  whole  arrangement  of  the  world  God  had  kept 
this  before  Him  as  the  end :  to  consult  the  interests  of  His  chosen 
people."  The  words,  "  when  the  Most  High  portioned  out  inherit- 
ance to  the  nations,"  etc.,  are  not  to  be  restricted  to  the  one  fact  of 
the  confusion  of  tongues  and  division  of  the  nations  as  described  in 
Gen.  xi.,  but  embrace  the  whole  period  of  the  development  of  the 
one  human  family  in  separate  tribes  and  nations,  together  with  their 
settlement  in  different  lands  ;  for  it  is  no  doctrine  of  the  Israelitish 
legend,  as  Kamphausen  supposes,  that  the  division  of  the  nations  was 
completed  once  for  all.  The  book  of  Genesis  simply  teaches,  that 
after  the  confusion  of  tongues  at  the  building  of  the  tower  of  Babel, 
God  scattered  men  over  the  entire  surface  of  the  earth  (chap.  xi. 


470  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

9),  and  that  the  nations  were  divided,  i.e,  separate  nations  were 
formed  from  the  families  of  the  sons  of  Noah  (Gen.  x.  32)  ;  that  is 
to  say,  the  nations  were  formed  in  the  divinely-appointed  way  of 
generation  and  multiplication,  and  so  spread  over  the  earth.  And 
the  Scriptures  say  nothing  about  a  division  of  the  countries  among 
the  different  nations  at  one  particular  time  ;  they  simply  show,  that, 
like  the  formation  of  the  nations  from  families  and  tribes,  the  posses- 
sion of  the  lands  by  the  nations  so  formed  was  to  be  traced  to  God, 
— was  the  work  of  divine  providence  and  government, — whereby 
God  so  determined  the  boundaries  of  the  nations  ("  the  nations " 
are  neitlier  the  tribes  of  Israel,  nor  simply  the  nations  round  about 
Canaan,  but  the  nations  generally),  that  Israel  might  receive  as  its 
inheritance  a  land  proportioned  to  its  numbers.^ — Ver.  9.  God  did 
this,  because  He  had  chosen  Israel  as  His  own  nation,  even  before 
it  came  into  existence.  As  the  Lord's  people  of  possession  (cf. 
chap.  vii.  6,  x.  15,  and  Ex.  xix.  5),  Israel  was  Jehovah's  portion, 
and  the  inheritance  assigned  to  Him.  p^n^  a  cord,  or  measure, 
then  a  piece  of  land  measured  off  ;  here  it  is  figuratively  applied  to 
the  nation. — Vers.  10  sqq.  He  had  manifested  His  fatherly  care 
and  love  to  Israel  as  His  own  property. 

Ver.  10.  "  He  found  him  in  the  land  of  the  desert,  and  in  the 
wilderness,  the  howling  of  the  steppe  ;  He  surrounded  him,  took  cave 
of  him,  protected  him  as  the  apple  of  His  eye^  These  words  do 
not  "  relate  more  especially  to  the  conclusion  of  the  covenant  at 
Sinai "  {Luther),  nor  merely  to  all  the  proofs  of  the  paternal  care 
with  which  God  visited  His  people  in  the  desert,  to  lead  them  to 
Sinai,  there  to  adopt  them  as  His  covenant  nation,  and  then  to 
guide  them  to  Canaan,  to  the  exclusion  of  their  deliverance  from 
the  bondage  of  Egypt.  The  reason  why  Moses  does  not  mention 
this  fact,  or  the  passage  through  the  Red  Sea,  is  not  to  be  sought 
for,  either  solely  or  even  in  part,  in  the  fact  that  "  the  song  does 
not  rest  upon  the  stand-point  of  the  Mosaic  times  ;"  for  we  may  see 
clearly  that  distance  of  time  would  furnish  no  adequate  ground  for 
"  singling  out  and  elaborating  certain  points  only  from  the  re- 
nowned stories  of  old,"  say  from  the  105th  Psalm,  which  no  one 
would  think  of  pronouncing  an  earlier  production  than  this  song. 

^  The  Septuagint  rendering,  "  according  to  the  number  of  the  angels  of 
God,"  is  of  no  critical  value, — in  fact,  is  nothing  more  than  an  arbitrary  inter- 
pretation founded  upon  the  later  Jewish  notion  of  guardian  angels  of  the  dif- 
ferent nations  (Sir.  xvii.  1-i),  which  probably  originated  in  a  misunderstanding 
of  chap.  iv.  19,  as  compared  with  Dan.  x.  13,  20,  21,  and  xii.  1. 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43.  471 

Nor  is  it  because  the  gracious  help  of  God,  which  the  people  expe- 
rienced up  to  the  time  of  the  exodus  from  Egypt,  was  inferior  in 
importance  to  the  divine  care  exercised  over  it  during  the  march 
through  the  desert  (a  fact  which  would  need  to  be  proved),  or  be- 
cause the  solemn  conclusion  of  the  covenant,  whereby  Israel  first 
became  the  people  of  God,  took  place  during  the  sojourn  at  Sinai, 
that  Moses  speaks  of  God  as  finding  the  people  in  the  desert  and 
adopting  them  there ;  but  simply  because  it  was  not  his  intention 
to  give  a  historical  account  of  tlie  acts  performed  by  God  upon  and 
towards  Israel,  but  to  describe  how  Israel  was  in  the  most  helpless  con- 
dition when  the  Lord  had  compassion  upon  it,  to  take  it  out  of  that 
most  miserable  state  in  which  it  must  have  perished,  and  bring  it  into, 
the  possession  of  the  richly-blessed  land  of  Canaan.  The  whole  de- 
scription of  what  the  Lord  did  for  Israel  (vers.  10-14)  is  figurative. 
Israel  is  represented  as  a  man  in  the  horrible  desert,  and  in  danger  of 
perishing  in  the  desolate  waste,  where  not  only  bread  and  water  had 
failed,  but  where  ravenous  beasts  lay  howling  in  wait  for  human  life, 
when  the  Lord  took  him  up  and  delivered  him  out  of  all  distress. 
The  expression  "found  him"  is  also  to  be  explained  from  this  figure. 
Finding  presupposes  seeking,  and  in  the  seeking  the  love  which  goes 
in  search  of  the  loved  one  is  manifested.  Also  the  expression  "land 
of  the  desert " — a  land  which  is  a  desert,  without  the  article  defin- 
ing the  desert  more  precisely — shows  that  the  reference  is  not  to 
the  finding  of  Israel  in  the  desert  of  Arabia,  and  that  these  words 
are  not  to  be  understood  as  relating  to  the  fact,  that  when  His 
people  entered  the  desert  the  Lord  appeared  to  them  in  the  pillar 
of  cloud  and  fire  (Ex.  xiii.  20,  Schultz).  For  although  the  figure 
of  the  desert  is  chosen,  because  in  reality  the  Lord  had  led  Israel 
through  the  Arabian  desert  to  Canaan,  we  must  not  so  overlook  the 
figurative  character  of  the  whole  description  as  to  refer  the  expres- 
sion "  in  a  desert  land "  directly  and  exclusively  to  the  desert  of 
Arabia.  The  measures  adopted  by  the  Pharaohs,  the  object  of 
which  was  the  extermination  or  complete  suppression  of  Israel, 
made  even  Egypt  a  land  of  desert  to  the  Israelites,  where  they 
would  inevitably  have  perished  if  the  Lord  had  not  sought,  found, 
and  surrounded  them  there.  To  depict  still  further  the  helplesi? 
and  irremediable  situation  of  Israel,  the  idea  of  the  desert  io 
heightened  still  further  by  the  addition  of  '1^1  ^nhn^^  "  and  in  fact  (1 
is  explanatory)  in  a  waste"  or  wilderness  (toJiu  recalls  Gen.  i.  2). 
"  Howling  of  the  desert "  is  in  apposition  to  tohu  (ivaste),  and  not  a 
genitive  dependent  upon  it,  viz.  "waste  of  the  howling  of  the  desert, 


472 


THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


or  of  the  desert  in  which  wild  beasts  howl"  (Ewald),  as  if  ^ 
stood  after  P'^^\  "Howling  of  the  desert"  does  not  mean  the 
desert  in  which  wild  beasts  howl,  but  the  howling  which  is  heard 
in  the  desert  of  wild  beasts.  The  meaning  of  the  passage,  there- 
fore, is  "in  the  midst  of  the  howling  of  the  wild  beasts  of  the 
desert."  This  clause  serves  to  strengthen  the  idea  of  tohu  (waste), 
and  describes  the  waste  as  a  place  of  the  most  horrible  howling  of 
wild  beasts.  It  was  in  this  situation  that  the  Lord  surrounded  His 
people.  ^?iD,  to  surround  with  love  and  care,  not  merely  to  protect 
(vid.  Ps.  xxvi.  6  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  22).  |.^^3,  from  T^  or  T?\},  to  pay  atten- 
tion, in  the  sense  of  "  not  to  lose  sight  of  them."  "  To  keep  as  the 
apple  of  the  eye"  is  a  figurative  description  of  the  tenderest  care. 
The  apple  of  the  eye  is  most  carefully  preserved  (vid.  Ps.  xvii.  8  ; 
Prov.  vii.  2). 

Ver.  11.  ''  As  an  eagle,  which  stirreth  up  its  nest  and  soars  over 
its  young,  lie  spread  out  His  loings,  took  him  up,  carried  him  upon 
His  wings,^  Under  the  figure  of  an  eagle,  which  teaches  its  young 
to  fly,  and  in  doing  so  protects  them  from  injury  with  watchful 
affection,  Moses  describes  the  care  with  which  the  Lord  came  to 
the  relief  of  His  people  in  their  helplessness,  and  assisted  them  to 
develop  their  strength.  This  figure  no  doubt  refers  more  especially 
to  the  protection  and  assistance  of  God  experienced  by  Israel  in  its 
journey  through  the  Arabian  desert ;  but  it  must  not  be  restricted 
to  this.  It  embraces  both  the  deliverance  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt 
by  the  outstretched  arm  of  the  Lord,  as  we  may  see  from  a  com- 
parison with  Ex.  xix.  4,  where  the  Lord  is  said  to  have  brought  His 
people  out  of  Egypt  upon  eagles'  wings,  and  also  the  introduction 
into  Canaan,  when  the  Lord  drove  the  Canaanites  out  from  before 
them  and  destroyed  them.  This  verse  contains  an  independent 
thought ;  the  first  half  is  the  protasis,  the  second  the  apodosis.  The 
nominative  to  "  spreadeth  abroad"  is  Jehovah ;  and  the  suffixes  in 
^nn|5^  and  ^nsfe^,  ("  taketh"  and  "  beareth")  refer  to  Israel  or  Jacob 
(ver.  9),  like  the  suffixes  in  ver.  10.  As  3  cannot  open  a  sentence 
like  IK'K?,  we  must  supply  the  relative  1K^  after  "»K^J.  i^p  T'jyn,  to 
waken  up,  rouse  up  its  nest,  i,e.  to  encourage  the  young  ones  to 
fly.  It  is  rendered  correctly  by  the  Vulgate,  provocans  ad  volan- 
dum  pullos  suos  ;  and  freely  by  Luther,  "  bringeth  out  its  young." 
"  Soareth  over  its  young  :^^  namely,  in  order  that,  when  they  w^ere 
attempting  to  fly,  if  any  were  in  danger  of  falling  through  ex- 
haustion, it  might  take  them  at  once  upon  its  powerful  wings,  and 
preserve  them  from  harm.     Examples  of  this,   according  to  the 


CHAF.  XXXII.  1-43.  473 

popular  belief,  are  given  by  Bochart  (Hieroz.  ii.  p.  762).  ^^n"),  from 
nn"i  to  be  loose  or  slack  (Jer.  xxiii.  9)  :  in  the  Piel  it  is  applied  to 
a  bird  in  the  sense  of  loosening  its  wings,  as  distinguished  from 
binding  its  wings  to  its  body;  hence  (1)  to  sit  upon  eggs  with 
loosened  wings,  and  (2)  to  fly  with  loosened  wings.  Here  it  is  used 
in  the  latter  sense,  because  the  young  are  referred  to.  The  point 
of  comparison  between  the  conduct  of  God  towards  Jacob  and  the 
acts  of  an  eagle  towards  its  young,  is  the  loving  care  with  which  He 
trained  Israel  to  independence.  The  carrying  of  Israel  upon  the 
eagle's  wings  of  divine  love  and  omnipotence  was  manifested  in  the 
most  glorious  way  in  the  guidance  of  it  by  the  pillar  of  cloud  and 
fire,  though  it  was  not  so  exclusively  in  this  visible  vehicle  of  the 
gracious  presence  of  God  as  that  the  comparison  can  be  restricted 
to  this  phenomenon  alone.  Luther^s  interpretation  is  more  correct 
than  this, — "  Moses  points  out  in  these  words,  how  He  fostered  them 
in  the  desert,  bore  with  their  manners,  tried  them  and  blessed  them 
that  they  might  learn  to  fly,  i.e.  to  trust  in  Him," — except  that  the 
explanation  of  the  expression  "  to  fly"  is  narrowed  too  much. 

Vers.  12—14.  "  The  Lord  alone  did  lead  him,  and  with  Him  was 
no  strange  god.  He  made  him  drive  over  the  high  places  of  the  earthy 
and  eat  the  productions  of  the  field ;  and  made  him  suck  honey  out  of 
the  rock,  and  oil  out  of  the  flint-stone.  Cream  of  cattle,  and  milk  of 
the  flock,  with  the  fat  of  lambs,  and  rams  of  BashanHs  kind,  and 
bucks,  with  the  kidney-fat  of  icheat :  and  grape-blood  thou  drankest 
as  fiery  wine^  Moses  gives  prominence  to  the  fact  that  Jehovah 
alone  conducted  Israel,  to  deprive  the  people  of  every  excuse  for 
their  apostasy  from  the  Lord,  and  put  their  ingratitude  in  all  the 
stronger  light.  If  no  other  god  stood  by  the  Lord  to  help  Him,  He 
had  thereby  laid  Israel  under  the  obligation  to  serve  Him  alone  as 
its  God.  "  With  Him"  refers  to  Jehovah,  and  not  to  Israel. — Vers. 
13, 14.  The  Lord  caused  the  Israelites  to  take  possession  of  Canaan 
with  victorious  power,  and  enter  upon  the  enjoyment  of  its  abundant 
blessings.  The  phrase,  "  to  cause  to  drive  over  the  high  places  of 
the  earth,"  is  a  figurative  expression  for  the  victorious  subjugation 
of  a  land  ;  it  is  not  taken  from  Ps.  xviii.  34,  as  Ewald  assumes,  but 
is  original  both  here  and  in  chap,  xxxiii.  29.  "Drive"  (ride)  is 
only  a  more  majestic  expression  for  "  advance."  The  reference  to 
this  passage  in  Isa.  Iviii.  14  is  unmistakeable.  Whoever  has  obtained 
possession  of  the  high  places  of  a  country  is  lord  of  the  land.  The 
"  high  places  of  the  earth  "  do  not  mean  the  high  places  of  Canaan 
only,  although  the  expression  in  this  instance  relates  to  the  posses- 


II 


474  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSE& 

sion  of  Canaan.  "  And  he  (Jacob)  ate  :"  for,  so  that  he  could  now 
eat,  the  productions  of  the  field,  and  in  fact  all  the  riches  of  the 
fruitful  land,  which  are  then  described  in  superabundant  terms. 
Honey  out  of  the  rock  and  oil  out  of  the  flint-stone,  i,e.  the  most 
valuable  productions  out  of  the  most  unproductive  places,  since  God 
so  blessed  the  land  that  even  the  rocks  and  stones  were  productive. 
The  figure  is  derived  from  the  fact  that  Canaan  abounds  in  wild 
bees,  which  make  their  hives  in  clefts  of  the  rock,  and  in  olive-trees 
which  grow  in  a  rocky  soil.  "  liock-flints,"  i.e.  rocky  flints.  The 
nouns  in  ver.  14  are  dependent  upon  "  to  suck "  in  ver.  13,  as  the 
expression  is  not  used  literally.  "  Things  which  are  sweet  and 
pleasant  to  eat,  people  are  in  the  habit  of  sucking"  {Ges,  thes. 
p.  601).  •^ijpn  and  ^Pn  (though  ^J},  seems  to  require  a  form  37n  ; 
vid,  Ewald,  §  213,  h.)  denote  the  two  forms  in  which  the  milk 
yielded  by  the  cattle  was  used ;  the  latter,  milk  in  general,  and  the 
former  thick  curdled  milk,  cream,  and  possibly  also  butter.  The 
two  are  divided  poetically  here,  the  cream  being  assigned  to  the 
cattle,  and  the  milk  to  the  sheep  and  goats.  "  The  fat  of  lamhsy^ 
i.e.  "  lambs  of  the  best  description  laden  with  fat"  (  Vitringa).  Fat 
is  a  figurative  expression  for  the  best  (vid.  Num.  xviii.  12).  '^  Aiid 
rams  :^^  grammatically,  no  doubt,  this  might  also  be  connected  with 
**  the  fat,"  but  it  is  improbable  from  a  poetical  point  of  view,  since  ■  I 
the  enumeration  would  thereby  drag  prosaically ;  and  it  is  also 
hardly  reconcilable  with  the  apposition  ]f^  ''J3,  ue.  reared  in  Bashan  _  _ 
(vid.  Ezek.  xxxix.  18),  which  implies  that  Bashan  was  celebrated  II 
for  its  rams,  and  not  merely  for  its  oxen.  This  epithet,  which 
Kamphausen  renders  "  of  Bashan's  kind,"  is  unquestionably  used 
for  the  best  description  of  rams.  The  list  becomes  poetical,  if  we 
take  "  rams"  as  an  accusative  governed  by  the  verb  "  to  suck"  (ver. 
13).  "  Kidney-fat  {i.e.  the  best  fat)  of  wheat,"  the  finest  and  most 
nutritious  wheat.  Wine  is  mentioned  last,  and  in  this  case  the  list 
passes  with  poetic  freedom  into  the  form  of  an  address.  "  Grape- 
blood"  for  red  wine  (as  in  Gen.  xlix.  11).  "ipn^  from  ion  to  fer- 
ment, froth,  foam,  lit.  the  foaming,  i.e.  fiery  wine,  serves  as  a 
more  precise  definition  of  the  "  blood  of  the  grape." 

Vers.  15-18.  Israel  had  repaid  its  God  for  all  these  benefits  by 
a  base  apostasy. — Ver.  15.  ''But  Righteous-nation  became  fat,  and 
struck  out — thou  becamest  fat,  thick,  gross — and  let  go  God  who 
made  him,  and  despised  the  rock  of  his  salvation."  So  much  is 
certain  concerning  Jeshurun,  that  it  was  an  honourable  surname 
given  to  Israel ;  that  it  is  derived  from  1^,  and  describes  Israel  as 


I 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43  475 

a  nation  of  just  or  right  men  (a  similar  description  to  that  given  by 
Balaam  in  Num.  xxiii.  10),  because  Jehovah,  who  is  just  and  right 
(ver.  4),  had  called  it  to  uprightness,  to  walk  in  His  righteousness, 
and  chosen  it  as  His  servant  (Isa.  xliv.  2).  The  prevalent  opinion, 
that  Jeshurun  is  a  diminutive,  and  signifies  rectalus^  or  "little 
pious"  (^Ges.  and  others),  has  no  more  foundation  than  the  deriva- 
tion from  Israel,  and  the  explanation,  "  little  Israel,"  since  there  is 
no  philological  proof  that  the  termination  un  ever  had  a  diminu- 
tive signification  in  Hebrew  (see  Uengstenherg,  Balaam,  p.  415)  ; 
and  an  appellatio  hlanda  et  charitativa  is  by  no  means  suitable  to 
this  passage,  much  less  to  chap,  xxxiii.  5.  The  epithet  Righteous- 
nation,  as  we  may  render  Jeshurun,  was  intended  to  remind  Israel 
of  its  calling,  and  involved  the  severest  reproof  of  its  apostasy. 
"  By  placing  the  name  of  righteous  before  Israel,  he  censured 
ironically  those  who  had  fallen  away  from  righteousness ;  and  by 
thus  reminding  them  with  what  dignity  they  had  been  endowed,  he 
upbraided  them  with  the  more  severity  for  their  guilt  of  perfidy. 
For  in  other  places  {sc.  chap,  xxxiii.  5,  26)  Israel  is  honoured  with 
an  eulogium  of  the  same  kind,  without  any  such  sinister  meaning, 
but  with  simple  regard  to  its  calling;  whilst  here  Moses  shows 
reproachfully  how  far  they  had  departed  from  that  pursuit  of  piety, 
to  the  cultivation  of  which  they  had  been  called"  {Calvin).  The 
w^ords,  "  became  fat,  and  struck  out,"  are  founded  upon  the  figure 
of  an  ox  that  had  become  fat,  and  intractable  in  consequence  {yid. 
Isa.  X.  27,  Hos.  iv.  16;  and  for  the  fact  itself,  Deut.  vi.  11,  viii.  10, 
xxxi.  20).  To  sharpen  this  reproof,  Moses  repeats  the  thought  in 
the  form  of  a  direct  address  to  the  people ;  "  Thou  hast  become  fat, 
stout,  gross."  Becoming  fat  led  to  forsaking  God,  the  Creator  and 
ground  of  its  salvation.  "  A  full  stomach  does  not  promote  piety, 
for  it  stands  secure,  and  neglects  God"  {Luther),  ?2J  is  no  doubt 
a  denom.  verb  from  i'J^?  ^*^'  *^  treat  as  a  fool,  i.e.  to  despise  {vid. 
Micah  vii.  6). 

Vers.  16-18.  "  Thei/  excited  His  jealousy  through  strange 
(gods),  they  provoked  Him  by  abominations.  They  sacrificed  to 
devils,  which  (were)  not-God;  to  gods  whom  they  knew  not,  to  new 
(ones)  that  had  lately  come  up,  whom  your  fathers  feared  not.  The 
rock  which  begat  thee  thou  forsookest,  and  hast  forgotten  the  God 
that  bare  thee^  These  three  verses  are  only  a  further  expansion  of 
ver.  156.  Forsaking  the  rock  of  its  salvation,  Israel  gave  itself 
up  to  the  service  of  worthless  idols.  The  expression  "excite  to 
jealousy"   is  founded  upon  the  figure  of   a   marriage  covenant, 


476  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


under  which  the  relation  of  the  Lord  to  Israel  is  represented  (yid. 
chap.  xxxi.  16,  and  the  com.  on  Ex.  xxxiv.  15).  "This  jealousy 
rests  upon  the  sacred  and  spiritual  marriage  tie,  by  which  God  had 
bound  the  people  to  Himself"  (Calvin).  "Strange  gods,"  with 
which  Israel  committed  adultery,  as  in  Jer.  ii.  25,  iii.  13.  The 
idols  are  called  "abominations"  because  Jehovah  abhorred  them 
(chap.  vii.  25,  xxvii.  15;  of.  2  Kings  xxiii.  13).  I3''*i^  signifies 
demons  in  Syriac,  as  it  has  been  rendered  by  the  LXX.  and  Vul- 
gate here ;  lit  lords,  like  Baalim.  It  is  also  used  in  Ps.  cvi.  37. — 
'^  Not- God/*  a  composite  noun,  in  apposition  to  Shedim  (devils), 
like  the  other  expressions  which  follow :  "  gods  whom  they  knew  M 
not,"  i.e.  who  had  not  made  themselves  known  to  them  as  gods  by  ^ 
any  benefit  or  blessing  (vtd,  chap.  xi.  28)  ;  "  new  (ones),  who  had 
come  from  near,"  i.e,  liad  but  lately  risen  up  and  been  adopted  by 
the  Israelites.  "  Near,"  not  in  a  local  but  in  a  temporal  sense,  in 
contrast  to  Jehovah,  who  had  manifested  and  attested  Himself  as 
God  from  of  old  (ver.  7).  '^W,  to  shudder,  construed  here  with 
an  accusative,  to  experience  a  holy  shuddering  before  a  person,  to 
revere  with  holy  awe. — In  ver.  18  Moses  returns  to  the  thought  of 
ver.  15,  for  the  purpose  o^  expressing  it  emphatically  once  more, 
and  paving  the  way  for  a  transition  to  the  description  of  the  acts 
of  the  Lord  towards  His  rebellious  nation.  To  brin^  out  still  more 
prominently  the  base  ingratitude  of  the  people,  he  represents  the 
creation  of  Israel  by  Jehovah,  the  rock  of  its  salvation,  under  the 
figure  of  generation  and  birth,  in  which  the  paternal  and  maternal 
love  of  the  Lord  to  His  people  had  manifested  itself,  ^^in^  to  twist 
round,  then  applied  to  the  pains  of  childbirth.  The  air,  Xey.  ""E^ri  is 
to  be  traced  to  n^^^  and  is  a  pausal  form  like  ""nj  in  chap.  iv.  33. 
iTK^  =  nriK^,  to  forget,  to  neglect. 

Vers.  19-33.  For  this  foolish  apostasy  the  Lord  would  severely 
visit  His  people.  This  visitation  is  represented  indeed  in  ver.  19, 
as  the  consequence  of  apostasy  that  had  taken  place, — not,  however, 
as  a  punishment  already  inflicted,  but  simply  as  a  resolution  which 
God  had  formed  and  would  carry  out, — an  evident  proof  that  we 
have  no  song  here  belonging  to  the  time  when  God  visited  with 
severe  punishments  the  Israelites  who  had  fallen  into  idolatry.  In 
ver.  19  the  determination  to  reject  the  degenerate  children  is  an- 
nounced, and  in  vers.  20-22  this  is  still  further  defined  and  ex- 
plained.— Ver.  19.  ^^  A7id  the  Lord  saw  it,  and  rejected — from 
indignation  at  His  sons  and  daughters."  The  object  to  "saw"  may 
easily  be  supplied  from  the  context :  He  saw  the  idolatry  of  the 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43.  477 

people,  and  rejected  those  who  followed  idols,  and  that  because  of 
indignation  that  His  sons  and  daughters  practised  such  abomina- 
tions. The  expression  "  he  saw  "  simply  serves  to  bring  out  the 
causal  link  between  the  apostasy  and  the  punishment.  Y^}^]  has 
been  very  well  rendered  by  KampJiausen,  "He  resolved  upon 
rejection,"  since  vers.  20  sqq.  clearly  show  that  the  rejection  had 
only  been  resolved  upon  by  God,  and  was  not  yet  carried  out.  In 
what  follows,  Moses  puts  this  resolution  into  the  mouth  bf  the 
Lord  Himself. — Vers.  20—22.  "  And  He  said,  I  will  hide  My  face 
from  them,  I  will  see  what  their  end  will  he  :  for  they  are  a  genera- 
tion full  of  perversities,  children  in  whom  is  no  faithfulness.  They 
excited  My  jealousy  by  a  no-god,  provoked  Me  by  their  vanities :  and 
I  also  tvill  excite  their  jealousy  by  a  no-people,  provoke  them  by  a 
foolish  nation.  For  a  fire  blazes  up  in  My  nose,  and  bums  to  the 
lowest  hell,  and  consumes  the  earth  with  its  increase,  and  sets  on  fire 
the  foundations  of  the  mountains^  The  divine  purpose  contains  two 
things  i^first  of  all  (ver.  20)  the  negative  side,  to  hide  the  face, 
i.e.  to  withdraw  His  favour  and  see  what  their  end  would  be,  i.e. 
that  their  apostasy  would  bring  nothing  but  evil  and  destruction ; 
for  they  were  "  a  nation  of  perversities "  (tahpuchoth  is  moral 
perversity,  Prov.  ii.  14,  vi.  14),  i.e.  "  a  thoroughly  perverse  and 
faithless  generation"  {Knobel)', — and  then,  secondly  (ver.  21),  the 
positive  side,  viz.  chastisement  according  to  the  right  of  complete 
retaliation.  The  Israelites  had  excited  the  jealousy  and  vexation  of 
God  by  a  no-god  and  vanities ;  therefore  God  would  excite  their 
jealousy  and  vexation  by  a  no-people  and  a  foolish  nation.  How 
this  retaliation  would  manifest  itself  is  not  fully  defined  however 
here,  but  is  to  be  gathered  from  the  conduct  of  Israel  towards  the 
Lord.  Israel  had  excited  the  jealousy  of  God  by  preferring  a  no- 
god,  or  l3y?Ll,  nothingnesses,  i.e.  gods  that  were  vanities  or  nothings 
(Elilim,  Lev.  xix.  4),  to  the  true  and  living  God,  its  Father  and 
Creator.  God  would  therefore  excite  them  to  jealousy  and  ill-will 
by  a  no-people,  a  foolish  nation,  i.e.  by  preferring  a  no-people  to 
the  Israelites,  transferring  His  favour  to  them,  and  giving  the 
blessing  which  Israel  had  despised  to  a  foolish  nation.  It  is  only 
with  this  explanation  of  the  words  that  full  justice  is  done  to  the 
idea  of  retribution ;  and  it  was  in  this  sense  that  Paul  understood 
this  passage  as  referring  to  the  adoption  of  the  Gentiles  as  the 
people  of  God  (Rom.  x.  19),  and  that  not  merely  by  adaptation, 
or  by  connecting  another  meaning  with  the  words,  as  Umbreit 
supposes,   but  by  interpreting  it   in   exact   accordance  with  the 


478  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


true  sense  of  the  words.^  The  adoption  of  the  Gentile  world 
into  covenant  with  the  Lord  involved  the  rejection  of  the  disobe- 
dient Israel ;  and  this  rejection  would  be  consummated  in  severe 
judgments,  in  which  the  ungodly  would  perish.  In  this  way  the 
retribution  inflicted  by  the  Lord  upon  the  faithless  and  perverse 
generation  of  His  sons  and  daughters  becomes  a  judgment  upon 
the  whole  world.  The  jealousy  of  the  Lord  blazes  up  into  a  fire 
of  wrath,  which  burns  down  to  sheol.  This  aspect  of  the  divine  ■ 
retribution  comes  into  the  foreground  in  what  follows,  from  ver.  23  « 
onwards ;  whilst  the  adoption  of  the  Gentile  world,  which  the 
Apostle  Paul  singles  out  as  the  leading  thought  of  this  verse,  in- 
accordance  with  the  special  purpose  of  the  song,  falls  back  behind 
the  thought,  that  the  Lord  would  not  utterly  destroy  Israel,  but 
when  all  its  strength  had  disappeared  would  have  compassion  upon 
His  servants,  and  avenge  their  blood  upon  His  foes.  The  idea 
of  a  no-people  is  to  be  gathered  from  the  antithesis  no-god.     As 

^  But  when  Kamphausen,  on  the  other  hand,  maintains  that  this  thought, 
•which  the  apostle  finds  in  the  passage  before  us,  would  be  "  quite  erroneous  if 
taken  as  an  exposition  of  the  words,"  the  assertion  is  supported  by  utterly- 
worthless  arguments :  for  example,  (1)  that  throughout  this  song  the  exalted 
heathen  are  never  spoken  of  as  the  bride  of  God,  but  simply  as  a  rod  of  disci- 
pline used  against  Israel ;  (2)  that  this  verse  refers  to  the  whole  nation  of 
Israel,  and  there  is  no  trace  of  any  distinction  between  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked ;  and  (3)  that  the  idea  that  God  would  choose  another  people  as  the 
covenant  nation  would  have  been  the  very  opposite  of  that  Messianic  hope  with 
which  the  author  of  this  song  was  inspired.  To  begin  with  the  last,  the  Mes- 
sianic hope  of  the  song  consisted  unquestionably  in  the  thought  that  the  Lord 
would  do  justice  to  His  people.  His  servants,  and  would  avenge  their  blood, 
even  when  the  strength  of  the  nation  should  have  disappeared  (vers.  3G  and 
43).  But  this  thought,  that  the  Lord  would  have  compassion  upon  Israel  at 
last,  by  no  means  excludes  the  reception  of  the  heathen  into  the  kingdom  of 
God,  as  is  suflBciently  apparent  from  Rom.  ix.-xi.  The  assertion  that  this  verse 
refers  to  the  whole  nation  is  quite  incorrect.  The  plural  suffixes  used  through- 
out in  vers.  20  and  21  show  clearly  that  both  verses  simply  refer  to  those  who 
had  fallen  away  from  the  Lord  ;  and  nowhere  throughout  the  whole  song  is  it 
assumed,  that  the  whole  nation  would  fall  away  to  the  very  last  man,  so  that 
there  would  be  no  further  remnant  of  faithful  servants  of  the  Lord,  to  whom 
the  Lord  would  manifest  His  favour  again.  And  lastly,  it  is  nowhere  affirmed 
that  God  would  simply  use  the  heathen  as  a  rod  against  Israel.  The  reference 
is  solely  to  enemies  and  oppressors  of  Israel ;  and  the  chastisement  of  Israel  by 
foes  holds  the  second,  and  therefore  a  subordinate,  place  among  the  evils  with 
which  God  would  punish  the  rebellious.  It  is  true  that  the  heathen  are  not 
described  as  the  bride  of  God  in  this  song,  but  that  is  for  no  other  reason  than 
because  the  idea  of  moving  them  to  jealousy  with  a  not-people  is  not  more 
fully  expanded. 


« 


I 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43.  479 

Schultz  justly  observes,  "  the  expression  no-people  can  no  more 
denote  a  people  of  monsters,  than  the  no-god  was  a  monster,  by 
which  Israel  had  excited  the  Lord  to  jealousy."  This  remark  is 
quite  sufficient  to  show  that  the  opinion  of  Ewald  and  others  is 
untenable  and  false,  namely,  that  "  the  expression  no-people  sig- 
nifies a  truly  inhuman  people,  terrible  and  repulsive."  No-god 
is  a  god  to  whom  the  predicate  of  godhead  cannot  properly  be 
applied ;  and  so  also  no-people  is  a  people  that  does  not  deserve  the 
name  of  a  people  or  nation  at  all.  The  further  definition  of  no- 
god  is  to  be  found  in  the  word  " vanities"  No-god  are  the  idols, 
who  are  called  vanities  or  nothingnesses,  because  they  deceive  the 
confidence  of  men  in  their  divinity ;  because,  as  Jeremiah  says 
(Jer.  xiv.  22),  they  can  give  no  showers  of  rain  or  drops  of  water 
from  heaven.  No-people  is  explained  by  a  "  foolish  nation."  A 
"foolish  nation"  is  the  opposite  of  a  wise  and  understanding 
people,  as  Israel  is  called  in  chap.  iv.  6,  because  it  possessed 
righteous  statutes  and  rights  in  the  law  of  the  Lord.  The  foolish 
nation  therefore  is  not  "  an  ungodly  nation,  which  despises  all  laws 
both  human  and  divine "  {Ros.,  Maur.),  but  a  people  whose  laws 
and  rights  are  not  founded  upon  divine  revelation.  Consequently 
the  no-people  is  not  "  a  barbarous  and  inhuman  people"  {Ros.),  or 
'*a  horde  of  men  that  does  not  deserve  to  be  called  a  people" 
(Maurer),  but  a  people  to  which  the  name  of  a  people  or  nation  is 
to  be  refused,  because  its  political  and  judicial  constitution  is  the 
work  of  man,  and  because  it  has  not  the  true  God  for  its  head  and 
king ;  or,  as  Vitringa  explains,  "  a  people  not  chosen  by  the  true 
God,  passed  by  when  a  people  was  chosen,  shut  out  from  the 
fellowship  and  grace  of  God,  alienated  from  the  commonwealth 
of  Israel,  and  a  stranger  from  the  covenant  of  promise  (Eph.  ii. 
12)."  In  this  respect  every  heathen  nation  was  a  "no-people," 
even  though  it  might  not  be  behind  the  Israelites  so  far  as  its  out- 
ward organization  was  concerned.  This  explanation  cannot  be  set 
aside,  either  by  the  objection  that  at  that  time  Israel  had  brought 
itself  down  to  the  level  of  the  heathen,  by  its  apostasy  from  the 
Eternal, — for  the  notion  of  people  and  no-people  is  not  taken  from 
the  outward  appearance  of  Israel  at  any  particular  time,  but  is 
derived  from  its  divine  idea  and  calling, — or  by  an  appeal  to  the 
singular,  "  a  foolish  nation,"  whereas  we  should  expect  "  foolish 
nations  "  to  correspond  to  the  "vanities,"  if  we  were  to  imderstand 
by  the  no-people  not  one  particular  heathen  nation,  but  the  heathen 
nations  generally.     The  singular,  "  a  foolish  nation,"  was  required 


480  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


I 


by  the  antithesis,  upon  which  it  is  founded,  the  "wise  nation," 
from  which  the  expression  no-people  first  receives  its  precise  defini- 
tion, which  would  be  altogether  obliterated  by  the  plural.  More- 
over, Moses  did  not  intend  to  give  expression  to  the  thought  that 
God  would  excite  Israel  to  jealousy  by  either  few,  or  many,  or  all 
the  Gentile  nations. 

In  ver.  22,  the  determination  of  the  Lord  with  regard  to  the 
faithless  generation  is  explained  by  the  threat,  that  the  vrrath  of 
the  Lord  which  was  kindled  against  this  faithlessness  would  set  the 
whole  world  in  flames  down  to  the  lowest  hell.  We  may  see  how 
far  the  contents  of  this  verse  are  from  favouring  the  conclusion  that.« 
"no-people"  means  a  barbarous  and  inhuman  horde,  from  the  diffi-  ^ 
ciilty  which  the  supporters  of  this  view  have  found  in  dealing  with 
the  word  ""S.  Ewald  renders  it  dock  (yet),  in  total  disregard  of  the 
usages  of  the  language  ;  and  Venema^  certe,  profecto  (surely)  ;  whilst 
Kamphausen  supposes  it  to  be  used  in  a  somewhat  careless  manner. 
The  contents  of  ver.  22,  which  are  introduced  with  ""S,  by  no  means 
harmonize  with  the  thought,  "  I  will  send  a  barbarous  and  inhuman 
horde ;"  whilst  the  announcement  of  a  judgment  setting  the  whole 
world  in  flames  may  form  a  very  suitable  explanation  of  the  thought, 
that  the  Lord  would  excite  faithless  Israel  to  jealousy  by  a  "  no- 
people."  This  judgment,  for  example,  would  make  the  worthless- 
ness  of  idols  and  the  omnipotence  of  the  God  of  Israel  manifest  in 
all  the  earth,  and  would  lead  the  nations  to  seek  refuge  and  salva- 
tion with  the  living  God ;  and,  as  we  learn  from  the  history  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  and  the  allusions  of  the  Apostle  Paul  to  this  mys- 
tery of  the  divine  counsels,  the  heathen  themselves  would  be  the 
first  to  do  so  when  they  savv  all  their  power  and  glory  falling  into 
ruins,  and  then  the  Israelites,  when  they  saw  that  God  had  taken 
the  kingdom  from  them  and  raised  up  the  heathen  who  were  con- 
verted to  Him  to  be  His  people.  The  fire  in  the  nose  of  the  Lord 
is  a  figurative  description  of  burning  wrath  and  jealousy  {yid.  chap.  . 
xxix.  19).  The  fire  signifies  really  nothing  else  than  His  jealousy,  m\ 
His  vital  energy,  and  in  a  certain  sense  His  breath ;  it  therefore 
naturally  burns  in  the  nose  (yid,  Ps.  xviii.  9).  In  this  sense  the  _. 
Lord  as  "a  jealous  God"  is  a  consuming  fire  {vid.  chap.  iv.  24,  and  H 
the  exposition  of  Ex.  iii.  2).  This  fire  burns  down  even  to  the  lower 
hell.  The  lower  hell,  i.e.  the  lowest  region  of  sheol,  or  the  lower 
regions,  forms  the  strongest  contrast  to  heaven ;  though  we  cannot 
deduce  any  definite  doctrinal  conclusions  from  the  expression  as  to 
the  existence  of  more  hells  than  one.     This  fire  "consumes  the 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43.  481 

earth  with  its  increase,"  i.e.  all  its  vegetable  productions,  and  sets 
on  fire  the  foundations  of  the  mountains.  This  description  is  not  a 
hyperbolical  picture  of  the  judgment  which  was  to  fall  upon  the 
children  of  Israel  alone  {Kamphausen,  Ahen-Ezra,  etc.) ;  for  it  is  a 
mistake  to  suppose  that  the  judgment  foretold  affected  the  Israelitish 
nation  only.  The  thought  is  weakened  by  the  assumption  that  the 
language  is  hyperbolical.  The  words  are  not  intended  to  foretell 
one  particular  penal  judgment,  but  refer  to  judgment  in  its  totality 
and  universality,  as  realized  in  the  course  of  centuries  in  different 
judgments  upon  the  nations,  and  only  to  be  completely  fulfilled  at 
the  end  of  the  world.  Calvin  is  right  therefore  when  he  says,  "As 
the  indignation  and  anger  of  God  follow  His  enemies  to  hell,  to 
eternal  flames  and  infernal  tortures,  so  they  devour  their  land  with 
its  produce,  and  burn  the  foundations  of  the  mountains ;  .  .  .  there 
is  no  necessity  therefore  to  imagine  that  there  is  any  hyperbole  in 
the  words,  '  to  the  lower  hell.' "  This  judgment  is  then  depicted  in 
vers.  23—33  as  it  would  discharge  itself  upon  rebellious  Israel. 

Ver.  23.  "  /  will  heap  up  evils  upon  them,  use  up  My  arrows 
against  them^  The  evils  threatened  against  the  despisers  of  the 
Lord  and  His  commandments  would  be  poured  out  in  great  abun- 
dance by  the  Lord  upon  the  foolish  generation.  nSD,  to  add  one 
upon  the  other  {yid.  Num.  xxxii.  14)  ;  hence  in  Hiphil  to  heap  up, 
sweep  together.  These  evils  are  represented  in  the  second  clause 
of  the  verse  as  arrows,  which  the  Lord  as  a  warrior  would  shoot 
away  at  His  foes  (as  in  ver.  42  ;  cf.  Ps.  xxxviii.  3,  xci.  5  ;  Job  vi. 
4).  n?3j  to  bring  to  an  end,  to  use  up  to  the  very  last. — Yer.  24. 
"  Have  they  wasted  away  with  hunger,  are  they  consumed  with  pesti- 
lential heat  and  hitter  plague :  I  will  let  loose  the  tooth  of  beasts  upon 
them,  with  the  poison  of  things  that  crawl  in  the  dustP — Yer.  25. 
"  If  the  sword  without  shall  sweep  them  away,  and  in  the  chambers  of 
terrors,  the  young  man  as  the  maiden,  the  suckling  with  the  grey- 
haired  manJ^  The  evils  mentioned  are  hunger,  pestilence,  plague, 
wild  beasts,  poisonous  serpents,  and  war.  The  first  hemistich  in 
ver.  24  contains  simply  nouns  construed  absolutely,  which  may  be 
regarded  as  a  kind  of  circumstantial  clause.  The  literal  meaning 
is,  "  With  regard  to  those  who  are  starved  with  hunger,  etc.,  I 
will  send  against  them ;"  i.e.  when  hunger,  pestilence,  plague,  have 
brought  them  to  the  verge  of  destruction,  I  will,  send,  etc.  ^O, 
construct  state  of  ntD,  utt.  Xey.,  with  which  Cocceius  compares  *^'0 
and  T^,  to  suck  out,  and  for  which  Schultens  has  cited  analogies 
from  the  Arabic.     "  Sucked  out  by  hunger,"  i.e.  wasted  away. 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  2  H 


482  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

"Tooth  of  beasts  and  poison  of  serpents:"  poetical  for  beasts  of 
prey  and  poisonous  animals.  See  Lev.  xxvi.  22,  where  wild  beasts 
are  mentioned  as  a  plague  along  with  pestilence,  famine,  and  sword. 
— Yer.  25.  These  are  accompanied  by  the  evils  of  war,  which 
sweeps  away  the  men  outside  in  the  slaughter  itself  by  the  sword, 
and  the  defenceless — viz.  youths  and  maidens,  sucklings  and  old 
men — in  the  chambers  by  alarm.  HD^i^  is  a  sudden  mortal  terror, 
and  Knohel  is  wrong  in  applying  it  to  hunger  and  plague.  The 
use  of  the  verb  i'S'^,  to  make  childless,  is  to  be  explained  on  the 
supposition  that  the  nation  or  land  is  personified  as  a  mother,  whose 
children  are  the  members  of  the  nation,  old  and  young  together. 
Ezekiel  has  taken  the  four  grievous  judgments  out  of  these  two 
verses :  sword,  famine,  w^ild  beasts,  and  pestilence  (Ezek.  xiv.  21 : 
see  also  v.  17,  and  Jer.  xv.  2,  3). 

Vers.  26  and  27.  "/  should  say,  I  will  Mow  them  away,  I  will 
blot  out  the  remembrance  of  them  among  men ;  if  I  did  not  fear  wrath 
upon  the  enemy,  that  their  enemies  might  mistake  it,  that  they  might 
say,  Our  hand  was  high,  and  Jehovah  has  not  done  all  this^  The 
meaning  is,  that  the  people  would  have  deserved  to  be  utterly  de- 
stroyed, and  it  was  only  for  His  own  name's  sake  that  God  abstained 
from  utter  destruction.  WOK  to  be  construed  conditionally  requires 
vv  :  if  I  did  not  fear  (as  actually  w^as  the  case)  I  should  resolve  to 
destroy  them,  without  leaving  a  trace  behind.  "  /  should  say^^  used 
to  denote  the  purpose  of  God,  like  "  he  said"  in  ver.  20.  The  air. 
\ey.  Dn''5<SX,  which  has  been  rendered  in  very  different  ways,  cannot 
be  regarded,  as  it  is  by  the  Rabbins,  as  a  denom,  verb  from  nsQ^  a 
corner  ;  and  Calvin  s  rendering,  "  to  scatter  through  corners,"  does 
not  suit  the  context ;  whilst  the  meaning,  "  to  cast  or  scare  out  of 
all  corners,"  cannot  be  deduced  from  this  derivation.  The  context 
requires  the  signification  to  annihilate,  as  the  remembrance  of  them 
was  to  vanish  from  the  earth.  We  get  this  meaning  if  we  trace  it 
to  nx3,  to  blow, — related  to  nya  (Isa.  xlii.  14)  and  nriB^  from  which 
comes  n3j — in  the  Hiphil  "  to  blow  away,"  not  to  blow  asunder. 
n^a^n,  not  "  to  cause  to  rest,"  but  to  cause  to  cease,  delere  (as  in 
Amos  viii.  4).  "  Wrath  upon  the  enemy ^^  i.e.  "displeasure  on  the 
part  of  God  at  the  arrogant  boasting  of  the  enemy,  which  was 
opposed  to  the  glory  of  God"  {Vitringa).  jS,  lest,  after  '^^^,  to  fear. 
On  this  reason  for  sparing  Israel,  see  chap.  ix.  28 ;  Ex.  xxxii.  12 ; 
Num.  xiv.  13  sqq. ;  Isa.  x.  5  sqq.  Enemy  is  a  generic  term,  hence 
it  is  followed  by  the  plural.  ^'^},  Piel,  to  find  strange,  sc.  the  de- 
struction of  Israel,  i.e.  to  mistake  the  reason  for  it,  or,  as  is  shown 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43.  483 

by  what  follows,  to  ascribe  the  destruction  of  Israel  to  themselves 
and  their  own  power,  whereas  it  had  been  the  work  of  God.  "  Our 
hand  was  high,^  i,e.  has  lifted  itself  up  or  shown  itself  mighty,  an 
intentional  play  upon  the  "  high  hand "  of  the  Lord  (Ex.  xiv.  8  ; 
cf.  Isa.  xxvi.  11). — The  reason  why  Israel  did  not  deserve  to  be 
spared  is  given  in  ver.  28  :  "  For  a  people  forsaken  of  counsel  are 
ihey^  and  there  is  not  understanding  in  themP  "  Forsaken  of  coun- 
sel," i.e.  utterly  destitute  of  counsel. 

This  want  of  understanding  on  the  part  of  Israel  is  still  further 
expounded  in  vers.  29-32,  where  the  words  of  God  pass  imper- 
ceptibly into  the  words  of  Moses,  who  feels  impelled  once  more  to 
impress  the  word  which  the  Lord  had  spoken  upon  the  hearts  of 
the  people. — Vers.  29-31.  "  If  they  were  wise,  they  would  understand 
this,  would  consider  their  end.  Ah,  how  could  one  pursue  a  thousand, 
and  two  put  ten  thousand  to  flight,  were  it  not  that  their  Rock  had 
sold  them,  and  Jehovah  had  given  them  up  I  For  their  rock  is  not 
as  our  rock ;  of  that  our  enemies  are  judges."  v  presupposes  a  case, 
which  is  either  known  not  to  exist,  or  of  which  this  is  assumed ; 
"  if  they  were  wise,"  which  they  are  not.  "  J'Azs"  refers  to  the 
leading  thought  of  the  whole,  viz.  that  apostasy  from  God  the 
Lord  is  sure  to  be  followed  by  the  severest  judgment.  "  Their 
end,"  as  in  ver.  20,  the  end  towards  which  the  people  were  going 
through  obstinate  perseverance  in  their  sin,  i.e.  utter  destruction,  if 
the  Lord  did  not  avert  it  for  His  name's  sake. — Ver.  30.  If  Israel 
were  wise,  it  could  easily  conquer  all  its  foes  in  the  power  of  its 
God  {vid.  Lev.  xxvi.  8)  ;  but  as  it  had  forsaken  the  Lord  its  rock. 
He,  their  (Israel's)  rock,  had  given  them  up  into  the  power  of  the 
foe.  ""S  ^^  C2K  is  more  emphatic  or  distinct  than  ^  D8<  only,  and 
introduces  an  exception  which  does  not  permit  the  desired  event  to 
take  place.  Israel  could  have  put  all  its  enemies  to  flight  were  it 
not  that  its  God  had  given  it  entirely  up  to  them  (sold  them  as 
slaves).  The  supposition  that  this  had  already  occurred  by  no 
means  proves,  as  Kamphausen  believes,  "  that  the  poet  was  speaking 
of  the  existing  state  of  the  nation,"  but  merely  that  Moses  thinks 
of  the  circumstances  as  certain  to  occur  when  the  people  should 
have  forsaken  their  God.  The  past  implied  in  the  verbs  "  sold " 
and  "  given  up  "  is  a  prophetically  ideal  past  or  present,  but  not  a 
real  and  historical  one.  The  assertion  of  Hupfeld  and  Kamphausen, 
that  "13^,  as  used  with  special  reference  to  the  giving  up  of  a  nation 
into  the  power  of  the  heathen,  "  belongs  to  a  somewhat  later  usage 
of  the  language,"  is  equally  groundless. — Ver.  31.  The  giving  up 


484  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

of  Israel  into  the  power  of  the  heathen  arose,  not  from  the  superior 
power  of  the  heathen  and  their  gods,  but  solely  from  the  apostasy 
of  Israel  from  its  own  God.  "  Our  rock,"  as  Moses  calls  the  Lord, 
identifying  himself  with  the  nation,  is  not  as  their  rock,  i.e.  the  gods 
in  whom  the  heathen  trust.  That  the  pronoun  in  "  their  rock  " 
refers  to  the  heathen,  is  so  perfectly  obvious  from  the  antithesis 
"owr  rock,"  that  there  cannot  possibly  be  any  doubt  about  it.  The 
second  hemistich  in  ver.  30  contains  a  circumstantial  clause,  intro- 
duced to  strengthen  the  thought  which  precedes  it.  The  heathen 
themselves  could  be  arbitrators  (vid,  Ex.  xxi.  22),  and  decide 
whether  tlie  gods  of  the  heathen  were  not  powerless  before  the 
God  of  Israel.  "  Having  experienced  so  often  the  formidable 
might  of  God,  they  knew  for  a  certainty  that  the  God  of  Israel 
was  very  different  from  their  own  idols"  (Calvin).  The  objection 
offered  by  Schultz,  namely,  that  "the  heathen  would  not  admit 
that  their  idols  were  inferior  to  Jehovah,  and  actually  denied  this 
at  the  time  when  they  had  the  upper  hand  (Isa.  x.  10,  11),"  has 
been  quite  anticipated  by  Calvin,  when  he  observes  that  Moses 
"  leaves  the  decision  to  the  unbelievers,  not  as  if  they  would  speak 
the  truth,  but  because  he  knew  that  they  must  be  convinced  by 
experience."  As  a  confirmation  of  this,  Luther  and  others  refer 
not  only  to  the  testimony  of  Balaam  (Num.  xxiii.  and  xxiv.),  but 
also  to  the  Egyptians  (Ex.  xiv.  25)  and  Philistines  (1  Sam.  v.  7 
sqq.),  to  which  we  may  add  Josh.  ii.  9,  10. 

Vers.  32  and  33.  "  For  their  vine  is  of  the  vine  of  Sodom,  and 
of  the  fields  of  Gomorrah  :  their  grapes  are  poisonous  grapes,  hitter 
clusters  have  they.  Dragon-poison  is  their  wine,  and  dreadful  vejiom 
of  asps.^^  The  connection  is  pointed  out  by  Calovius  thus :  "  Moses 
returns  to  the  Jews,  showing  why,  although  the  rock  of  the  Jews 
was  very  different  from  the  gods  of  the  Gentiles,  even  according  to 
the  testimony  of  the  heathen  themselves,  who  were  their  foes,  they 
were  nevertheless  to  be  put  to  flight  by  their  enemies  and  sold ;  and 
why  Jehovah  sold  them,  namely,  because  their  vine  was  of  the  vine 
of  Sodom,  i.e.  of  the  very  worst  kind,  resembling  the  inhabitants  of 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  as  if  they  were  descended  from  them,  and 
not  from  their  holy  patriarchs."  The  "/or"  in  ver.  32  is  neither 
co-ordinate  nor  subordinate  to  that  in  ver.  31.  To  render  it  as 
subordinate  would  give  no  intelligible  meaning ;  and  the  supposi- 
tion that  it  is  co-ordinate  is  precluded  by  the  fact,  that  in  that  case 
vers.  32  and  33  would  contain  a  description  of  the  corruptions  of 
the  heathen.    The  objections  to  this  view  have  been  thus  expressed 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43.  485 

by  Schultz  with  perfect  justice  :  "  It  is  a  'priori  inconceivable,  that 
in  so  short  an  ode  there  should  be  so  elaborate  a  digression  on  the 
subject  of  the  heathen,  seeing  that  their  folly  is  altogether  foreign 
to  the  theme  of  the  whole."  To  this  we  may  add,  that  throughout 
the  Old  Testament  it  is  the  moral  corruption  and  ungodliness  of 
the  Israelites,  and  never  the  vices  of  the  heathen,  that  are  compared 
to  the  sins  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.  The  Israelites  who  were  for- 
saken by  the  Lord,  were  designated  by  Isaiah  (i.  10)  as  a  people 
of  Gomorrah,  and  their  rulers  as  rulers  of  Sodom  (cf.  Isa.  iii.  9)  ; 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  were  all  of  them  like  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah  (Jer.  xxiii.  14) ;  and  the  sin  of  Jerusalem  was  greater 
than  that  of  Sodom  (Ezek.  xvi.  46  sqq.).  The  only  sense  in  which 
the  "  for"  in  ver.  32  can  be  regarded  as  co-ordinate  to  that  in 
ver.  31,  is  on  the  supposition  that  the  former  gives  the  reason  for 
the  thought  in  ver.  30^,  whilst  the  latter  serves  to  support  the  idea 
in  ver.  30a.  The  order  of  thought  is  the  following ;  Israel  would 
have  been  able  to  smite  its  foes  with  very  little  difficulty,  because 
the  gods  of  the  heathen  are  not  a  rock  like  Jehovah  ;  but  Jehovah 
had  given  up  His  people  to  the  heathen,  because  it  had  brought 
forth  fruits  like  Sodom,  i.e.  had  resembled  Sodom  in  its  wickedness. 
The  vine  and  its  fruits  are  figurative  terms,  applied  to  the  nation 
and  its  productions.  "  The  nation  was  not  only  a  degenerate,  but 
also  a  poisonous  vine,  producing  nothing  but  what  was  deadly" 
{Calvin).  This  figure  is  expanded  still  further  by  Isa.  v.  2  sqq. 
Israel  was  a  vineyard  planted  by  Jehovah,  that  it  might  bring 
forth  good  fruits,  instead  of  which  it  brought  forth  wild  grapes 
{vid.  Jer.  ii.  21  ;  Ps.  Ixxx.  9  sqq. ;  Hos.  x.  1).  "  Their  vine"  is 
the  Israelites  themselves,  their  nature  being  compared  to  a  vine 
which  had  degenerated  as  much  as  if  it  had  been  an  offshoot  of  a 
Sodomitish  vine.  nbnK*,  the  construct  state  of  HblK^,  floors,  fields. 
The  grapes  of  this  vine  are  worse  than  wild  grapes,  they  are  bitter, 
poisonous  grapes. — Ver.  33.  The  wine  of  these  grapes  is  snake- 
poison.  Tannin  :  see  Ex.  vii.  9,  10.  PetJien:  the  asp  or  adder,  one 
of  the  most  poisonous  kinds  of  snake,  whose  bite  was  immediately 
fatal  (vid.  BosemniiUer,  MM.  AIM.  iv.  2,  pp.  364  sqq.).  These 
figures  express  the  thought,  that  "  nothing  could  be  imagined  worse, 
or  more  to  be  abhorred,  than  that  nation"  (Calvin).  Now  although 
this  comparison  simply  refers  to  the  badness  of  Israel,  the  thought 
of  the  penal  judgment  that  fell  upon  Sodom  lies  behind.  "  They 
imitate  the  Sodomites,  they  bring  forth  the  worst  fruits  of  all  im- 
piety, they  deserve  to  perish  like  Sodom  "  (J.  H.  Michaelis), 


486  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

The  description  of  this  judgment  commences  in  ver.  34.  Israel 
had  deserved  for  its  corruption  to  be  destroyed  from  the  earth  (ver. 
26) ;  yet  for  His  name's  sake  the  Lord  would  have  compassion 
upon  it,  when  it  was  so  humiliated  with  its  heavy  punishments  that 
its  strength  was  coming  to  an  end. — Yer.  34.  "  7s  not  this  hidden 
with  Me  J  sealed  up  in  My  treasuries  ?"  The  allusion  in  this  verse 
has  been  disputed ;  many  refer  it  to  what  goes  before,  others  to 
what  follows  after.  There  is  some  truth  in  both.  The  verse  forms 
the  transition,  closing  what  precedes,  and  introducing  what  follows. 
The  assertion  that  the  figure  of  preserving  in  the  treasuries  pre- 
cludes the  supposition  that  "  this "  refers  to  what  follows,  cannot 
be  sustained.  For  although  in  Hos.  xiii.  12,  and  Job  xiv.  17,  the 
binding  and  sealing  of  sins  in  a  bundle  are  spoken  of,  yet  it  is  very 
evident  from  Ps.  cxxxix.  16,  Mai.  iii.  16,  and  Dan.  vii.  10,  that  not 
only  the  evil  doings  of  men,  but  their  days  generally,  i.e.  not  only 
their  deeds,  but  the  things  which  happen  to  them,  are  written  in  a 
book  before  God.  0.  v,  Gerlach  has  explained  it  correctly  :  "  All 
these  things  have  been  decreed  long  ago  ;  their  coming  is  infallibly 
certain."  "  This  "  includes  not  only  the  sins  of  the  nation,  but  also 
the  judgments  of  God.  The  apostasy  of  Israel,  as  well  as  the 
consequent  punishment,  is  laid  up  with  God — sealed  up  in  His 
treasuries — and  therefore  they  have  not  yet  actually  occuiTed  :  an 
evident  proof  that  we  have  prophecy  before  us,  and  not  the  de- 
scription of  an  apostasy  that  had  already  taken  place,  and  of  the 
punishment  inflicted  in  consequence.  The  dir,  Xey.  D»3  in  this 
connection  signifies  to  lay  up,  preserve,  conceal,  although  the  ety- 
mology is  disputed.  The  figure  in  the  second  hemistich  is  not 
taken  from  secret  archives,  but  from  treasuries  or  stores,  in  which 
whatever  was  to  be  preserved  was  to  be  laid  up,  to  be  taken  out 
in  due  time. 

Vers.  35  and  36.  "  Vengeance  is  Mine,  and  retribution  for  the 
time  when  their  foot  shall  shake :  for  the  day  of  their  destruction  is 
near,  and  that  which  is  determined  for  them  cometh  hastily.  For  the 
Lord  will  judge  His  people,  and  have  compassion  upon  His  servants, 
when  He  seeth  that  every  hold  has  disappeared,  and  the  fettered  and 
the  free  are  gone" — Thfe  Lord  will  punish  the  sins  of  His  people 
in  due  time.  "  Vengeance  is  Mine  :"  it  belongs  to  Me,  it  is  My 
part  to  inflict,  ap}^  is  a  noun  here  for  the  usual  Dl^*^,  retribution 
(vid,  Ewald,  §  156,  h.).  The  shaking  of  the  foot  is  a  figure  repre- 
senting the  commencement  of  a  fall,  or  of  stumbling  {vid.  Ps. 
xxxviii.  17,  xciv.  18).     The  thought  in  this  clause  is  not,  "  At  or 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43.  487 

towards  the  time  when  then*  misfortune  begins,  I  will  plunge  them 
into  the  greatest  calamity,"  as  Kamphausen  infers  from  the  fact 
that  the  shaking  denotes  the  beginning  of  the  calamity ;  and  yet 
the  vengeance  can  only  be  completed  by  plunging  them  into 
calamity, — a  thought  which  he  justly  regards  as  unsuitable,  though 
he  resorts  to  emendations  of  the  text  in  consequence.  But  the 
supposed  unsuitability  vanishes,  if  we  simply  regard  the  words, 
"  Vengeance  is  Mine,  and  retribution,"  not  as  the  mere  announce- 
ment of  a  quality  founded  in  tlie  nature  of  God,  and  residing  in 
God  Himself,  but  as  an  expression  of  the  divine  energy,  with  this 
signification,  I  will  manifest  Myself  as  an  avenger  and  recompenser, 
when  their  foot  shall  shake.  Then  what  had  hitherto  been  hidden 
with  God,  lay  sealed  up  as  it  were  in  His  treasuries,  should  come 
to  light,  and  be  made  manifest  to  the  sinful  nation.  God  would 
not  delay  in  this ;  for  the  day  of  their  destruction  was  near.  T'i^ 
signifies  misfortune,  and  sometimes  utter  destruction.  The  primary 
meaning  of  the  word  cannot  be  determined  with  certainty.  That 
it  does  not  mean  utter  destruction,  we  may  see  from  the  parallel 
clause.  *''  The  things  that  shall  come  upon  them,"  await  them,  or 
are  prepared  for  them,  are,  according  to  the  context,  both  in  ver. 
26  and  also  in  vers.  36  sqq.,  not  destruction,  but  simply  a  calamity 
or  penal  judgment  that  would  bring  them  near  to  utter  destruction. 
Again,  these  words  do  not  relate  to  the  punishment  of  "  the  wicked 
deeds  of  the  inhuman  horde,"  or  the  vengeance  of  God  upon  the 
enemies  of  Israel  {Ewald^  Kamphausen)^  but  to  the  vengeance  or 
retribution  which  God  would  inflict  upon  Israel.  This  is  evident, 
apart  from  what  has  been  said  above  against  the  application  of  vers. 
33,  34,  to  the  heathen,  simply  from  ver.  366,  which  unquestionably 
refers  to  Israel,  and  has  been  so  interpreted  by  every  commentator. 
— The  first  clause  is  quoted  in  Rom.  xii.  19  and  Heb.  x.  30,  in 
the  former  to  warn  against  self-revenge,  in  the  latter  to  show  the 
energy  with  which  God  will  punish  those  who  fall  away  from  the 
faith,  in  connection  with  ver.  36a,  "  the  Lord  will  judge  His 
people." — In  ver.  36  the  reason  is  given  for  the  thought  in  ver.  35. 
n  is  mostly  taken  here  in  the  sense  of  "  procure  right,"  help  to 
right,  which  it  certainly  often  has  {e.g.  Ps.  liv.  3),  and  which  is  not 
to  be  excluded  here  ;  but  this  by  no  means  exhausts  the  idea  of  the 
word.  The  parallel  CDmn''  does  not  compel  us  to  drop  the  idea  of 
punishment,  which  is  involved  in  the  judging ;  for  it  is  a  question 
whether  the  two  clauses  are  perfectly  synonymous.  "  Judging  His 
people"  did  not  consist  merely  in  the  fact  that  Jehovah  punished 


488  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

the  heathen  who  oppressed  Israel,  but  also  in  the  fact  that  He 
punished  the  wicked  in  Israel  who  oppressed  the  righteous.  "  His 
people  "  is  no  doubt  Israel  as  a  whole  (as,  for  example,  in  Isa.  i.  3)  , 
but  this  whole  was  composed  of  righteous  and  wicked,  and  God 
could  only  help  the  righteous  to  justice  by  punishing  and  destroy- 
ing the  wicked.  In  this  way  the  judging  of  His  people  became 
compassion  towards  His  servants.  "  His  servants "  are  the  right- 
eous, or,  speaking  more  correctly,  all  who  in  the  time  of  judgment 
are  found  to  be  the  servants  of  God,  and  are  saved.  Because  Israel 
was  His  nation,  the  Lord  judged  it  in  such  a  manner  as  not  to 
destroy  it,  but  simply  to  punish  it  for  its  sins,  and  to  have  compas- 
sion upon  His  servants,  when  He  saw  that  the  strength  of  the 
nation  was  gone.  1J,  the  hand,  with  which  one  grasps  and  works, 
is  a  figure  employed  to  denote  power  and  might  (vid,  Isa.  xxviii.  2). 
pl^,  to  run  out,  or  come  to  an  end  (I  Sam.  ix.  7  ;  Job  xiv.  11). 
The  meaning  is,  "  when  every  support  is  gone,"  when  all  the  rotten 
props  of  its  might,  upon  which  it  has  rested,  are  broken  {Ewald), 
The  noun  DDK,  cessation,  disappearance,  takes  the  place  of  a  verb. 
The  words  ^^tyi  "iivy  are  a  proverbial  phrase  used  to  denote  all  men, 
as  we  may  clearly  see  from  1  Kings  xiv.  10,  xxi.  21 ;  2  Kings  iv. 
8,  xiv.  6.  The  literal  meaning  of  this  form,  however,  cannot  be 
decided  with  certainty.  The  explanation  given  by  L,  de  Dieu  is 
the  most  plausible  one,  viz.  the  man  who  is  fettered,  restrained, 
i.e,  married,  and  the  single  or  free.  For  ^'ity  the  meaning  caelehs 
is  established  by  the  Arabic,  though  the  Arabic  can  hardly  be  ap- 
pealed to  as  proving  that  "iivy  means  paterfamilias,  as  this  meaning, 
which  Roediger  assigns  to  the  Arabic  word,  is  founded  upon  a 
mistaken  interpretation  of  a  passage  in  Kamus, 

Vers.  37-39.  The  Lord  would  then  convince  His  people  of  the 
worthlessness  of  idols  and  the  folly  of  idolatry,  and  bring  it  to 
admit  the  fact  that  He  was  God  alone.  "  Then  will  He  say,  Where 
are  their  gods,  the  rock  in  whom  they  trusted;  who  consumed  the  fat  of 
their  burnt-offerings,  the  wine  of  their  libations  ?  Let  them  rise  up 
and  help  you,  that  there  may  be  a  shelter  over  you  !  See  now  that  I, 
I  am  it,  and  there  is  no  God  beside  Me :  I  kill,  and  m/xke  alive ;  I 
smite  in  pieces,  and  I  heal;  and  there  is  no  one  who  delivers  out  of  My 
handr  "I0^5"I  might  be  taken  impersonally,  as  it  has  been  by  Luther 
and  others,  "  men  will  say ;"  but  as  it  is  certainly  Jehovah  who  is 
speaking  in  ver.  39,  and  what  Jehovah  says  there  is  simply  a 
deduction  from  what  is  addressed  to  the  people  in  vers.  37  and  38, 
there  can  hardly  be  any  doubt  that  Jehovah  is  speaking  in  vers. 


CHAP.  XXXII.  1-43.  489 

37,  38,  as  well  as  in  vers.  34,  35,  and  therefore  that  Moses  simply 
distinguishes  himself  from  Jehovah  in  ver.  36,  when  explaining  the 
reason  for  the  judgment  foretold  hj  the  Lord.  The  expression, 
"  their  gods,"  relates,  not  to  the  heathen,  but  to  the  Israelites,  upon 
whom  the  judgment  had  fallen.  The  worthlessness  of  their  gods 
had  become  manifest,  namely,  of  the  strange  gods  or  idols,  which 
the  Israelites  had  preferred  to  the  living  God  (vid.  vers.  16,  17), 
and  to  which  they  had  brought  their  sacrifices  and  drink-offerings. 
In  ver.  38,  "^f^.  is  the  subject, — the  gods,  who  consumed  the  fat 
of  the  sacrifices  offered  to  them  by  their  worshippers  (the  foolish 
Israelites), — and  is  not  to  be  taken  as  the  relative  with  ^^''H^t?  as  the 
LXX.,  Vulg.,  and  Luther  have  rendered  it,  viz.  "  whose  sacrifices 
they  (the  Israelites)  ate,"  which  neither  suits  the  context  nor  the 
word  27r\  (fat),  which  denotes  the  fat  portions  of  the  sacrificial 
animals  that  were  burned  upon  the  altar,  and  therefore  presented 
to  God.  The  wine  of  the  drink-offerings  was  also  poured  out  upon 
the  altar,  and  thus  given  up  to  the  deity  worshipped.  The  handing 
over  of  the  sacrificial  portions  to  the  deity  is  described  here  with 
holy  irony,  as  though  the  gods  themselves  consumed  the  fat  of  the 
slain  offerings,  and  drank  the  wine  poured  out  for  them,  for  the 
purpose  of  expressing  this  thought :  "  The  gods,  whom  ye  entertained 
so  well,  and  provided  so  abundantly  with  sacrifices,  let  them  now 
arise  and  help  you,  and  thus  make  themselves  clearly  known  to 
you."  The  address  here  takes  the  form  of  a  direct  appeal  to  the 
idolaters  themselves  ;  and  in  the  last  clause  the  imperative  is  intro- 
duced instead  of  the  optative,  to  express  the  thought  as  sharply  as 
possible,  that  men  need  the  protection  of  God,  and  are  warranted 
in  expecting  it  from  the  gods  they  worship  :  "  let  there  be  a  shelter 
over  you."  Sithrah  for  sether,  a  shelter  or  defence. — Ver.  39.  The 
appeal  to  their  own  experience  of  the  worthlessness  of  idols  is 
followed  by  a  demand  that  they  should  acknowledge  Jehovah  as 
the  only  true  God.  The  repetition  of  "  /"  is  emphatic :  "  /,  /  onfy 
it"  as  an  expression  of  being;  I  am  it,  i^o)  elfit,  John  viii.  24, 
xviii.  5.  The  predicate  Elohim  {vid.  2  Sam.  vii.  28  ;  Isa.  xxxvii. 
16)  is  omitted,  because  it  is  contained  in  the  thought  itself,  and 
moreover  is  clearly  expressed  in  the  parallel  clause  which  follows, 
"  there  is  not  a  God  beside  Me."  Jehovah  manifests  Himself  in 
His  doings,  which  Israel  had  experienced  already,  and  still  continued 
to  experience.  He  kills  and  makes  alive,  etc.,  i.e.  He  has  the  power 
of  life  and  death.  These  words  do  not  refer  to  the  immortality  of 
the  soul,  but  to  the  restoration  to  life  of  the  people  of  IsraeU  which 


490  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

God  had  delivered  up  to  death  (so  1  Sam.  ii.  6  ;  2  Kings  v.  7  ;  cf. 
Isa.  xxvi.  19  ;  Hos.  xiii.  10 ;  Wisd.  xvi.  13  ;  Tobit  xiii.  2).  This 
thought,  and  the  following  one,  which  is  equally  consolatory,  that 
God  smites  and  heals  again,  are  frequently  repeated  by  the  prophets 
{vid.  Hos.  vi.  1 ;  Isa.  xxx.  26,  Ivii.  17,  18  ;  Jer.  xvii.  14).  None 
can  deliver  out  of  His  hand  {vid.  Isa.  xliii.  13 ;  Hos.  v.  14,  ii.  12). 
Vers.  40-43.  The  Lord  will  show  Himself  as  the  only  true  God, 
who  slays  and  makes  alive,  etc.  He  will  take  vengeance  upon  His 
enemies,  avenge  the  blood  of  His  servants,  and  expiate  His  land. 
His  people.  With  this  promise,  which  is  full  of  comfort  for  all  the 
servants  of  the  Lord,  the  ode  concludes.  "  For  I  lift  up  My  hand 
to  heaven,  and  say,  As  truly  as  I  live  for  ever,  if  I  have  sharpened 
My  flashing  sword,  and  My  hand  grasps  for  judgment,  I  will  repay 
vengeance  to  My  adversaries,  and  requite  My  haters,  I  will  make  My 
arrows  drunk  with  blood,  and  My  sword  loill  eat  flesh;  with  the  blood 
of  the  slain  and  prisoners,  with  the  hairy  head  of  the  foeV  Lifting 
up  the  hand  to  heaven  was  a  gesture  by  which  a  person  taking  an 
oath  invoked  God,  who  is  enthroned  in  heaven,  as  a  witness  of  the 
truth  and  an  avenger  of  falsehood  (Gen.  xiv.  22).  Here,  as  in 
Ex.  vi.  8  and  Num.  xiv.  30,  it  is  used  anthropomorphical ly  of  God, 
who  is  in  heaven,  and  can  swear  by  no  greater  than  Himself  {vid, 
Isa.  xiv.  23  ;  Jer.  xxii.  5  ;  Heb.  vi.  17).  The  oath  follows  in  vers. 
41  and  42.  Dl^,  however,  is  not  the  particle  employed  in  swearing, 
which  has  a  negative  meaning  {vid.  Gen.  xiv.  23),  but  is  conditional, 
and  introduces  the  protasis.  As  the  avenger  of  His  people  upon 
their  foes,  the  Lord  is  represented  as  a  warlike  hero,  who  whets  His 
sword,  and  has  a  quiver  filled  with  arrows  (as  in  Ps.  vii.  13).  "As 
long  as  the  Church  has  to  make  war  upon  the  world,  the  flesh,  and 
the  devil,  it  needs  a  warlike  head"  {Schultz).  ^7.'!?  P1?>  the  flash  of 
the  sword,  i.e.  the  flashing  sword  {vid.  Gen.  iii.  24  ;  Nahum  iii.  3  ; 
Hab.  iii.  11).  In  the  next  clause,  "  and  My  hand  grasps  judgment," 
mishpat  (judgment)  does  not  mean  punishment  or  destruction  hurled 
by  God  upon  His  foes,  nor  the  weapons  employed  in  the  execution 
of  judgment,  but  judgment  is  introduced  poetically  as  the  thing 
which  God  takes  in  hand  for  the  purpose  of  carrying'  it  out. 
DjJJ  y^\i,  to  lead  back  vengeance,  i.e.  to  repay  it.  Punishment  is 
retribution  for  evil  done.  By  the  enemies  and  haters  of  Jehovah 
we  need  not  understand  simply  the  heathen  enemies  of  the  Israelites, 
for  the  ungodly  in  Israel  were  enemies  of  God  quite  as  much  as 
the  ungodly  heathen.  If  it  is  evident  from  vers.  25-27,  where  God 
is  spoken  of  as  punishing  Israel  to  the  utmost  when  it  had  fallen 


I 


CHAP.  XXXIL  1-43.  491 

into  idolatry,  but  not  utterly  destroying  it,  that  the  punishment 
which  God  would  inflict  would  also  fall  upon  the  heathen,  who 
would  have  made  an  end  of  Israel ;  it  is  no  less  apparent  from  vers. 
37  and  38,  especially  from  the  appeal  in  ver.  38,  Let  your  idols  arise 
and  help  you  (ver.  38),  which  is  addressed,  as  all  admit,  to  the 
idolatrous  Israelites,  and  not  to  the  heathen,  that  those  Israelites 
who  had  made  worthless  idols  their  rock  would  be  exposed  to  the 
vengeance  and  retribution  of  the  Lord.  In  ver.  42  the  figure  of 
the  warrior  is  revived,  and  the  judgment  of  God  is  carried  out  still 
further  under  this  figure.  Of  the  four  different  clauses  in  this 
verse,  the  third  is  related  to  the  first,  and  the  fourth  to  the  second. 
God  would  make  His  arrows  drunk  with  the  blood  not  only  of  the 
slain,  but  also  of  the  captives,  whose  lives  are  generally  spared,  but 
were  not  to  be  spared  in  this  judgment.  This  sword  would  eat  flesh 
of  the  hairy  head  of  the  foe.  The  edge  of  the  sword  is  represented 
poetically  as  the  mouth  with  which  it  eats  (2  Sam.  ii.  26,  xviii.  8, 
etc.)  ;  "  the  sword  is  said  to  devour  bodies  when  it  slays  them  by 
piercing"  {Ges,  thes.  p.  1088).  J^^VJQ,  from  jnsa,  a  luxuriant,  uncut 
growth  of  hair  (Num.  vi.  5  ;  see  at  Lev.  x.  6).  The  hairy  head  is 
not  a  figure  used  to  denote  the  "  wild  and  cruel  foe  "  (Knobel),  but 
a  luxuriant  abundance  of  strength,  and  the  indomitable  pride  of  the 
foe,  who  had  grown  fat  and  forgotten  his  Creator  (ver.  15).  This 
explanation  is  confirmed  by  Ps.  Ixviii.  22  ;  whereas  the  rendering 
ap')(pvTe^j  princes,  leaders,  which  is  given  in  the  Septuagint,  has  no 
foundation  in  the  language  itself,  and  no  tenable  support  in  Judg. 
v.  2. — Ver.  43.  For  this  retribution  which  God  accomplishes  upon 
His  enemies,  the  nations  were  to  praise  the  people  of  the  Lord.  As 
this  song  commenced  with  an  appeal  to  heaven  and  earth  to  give 
glory  to  the  Lord  (vers.  1-3),  so  it  very  suitably  closes  with  an 
appeal  to  the  heathen  to  rejoice  with  His  people  on  account  of  the  acts 
of  the  Lord.  "  Rejoice,  nations,  over  His  people ;  for  He  avenges 
the  blood  of  His  servants,  and  repays  vengeance  to  His  adversaries, 
and  so  expiates  His  land.  His  people."  "His  people"  is  an  accu- 
sative, and  not  in  apposition  to  nations  in  the  sense  of  "nations 
which  are  His  people."  For,  apart  from  the  fact  that  such  a 
combination  would  be  unnatural,  the  thought  that  the  heathen  had 
become  the  people  of  God  is  nowhere  distinctly  expressed  in  the 
song  (not  even  in  ver.  21)  ;  nor  is  the  way  even  so.  prepared  for  it 
as  that  we  could  expect  it  here,  although  the  appeal  to  the  nations 
to  rejoice  with  His  people  on  account  of  what  God  had  done  involves 
the  Messianic  idea,  that  all  nations  will  come  to  the  knowledge  of 


492  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES.  " 

the  Lord  (vid.  Ps.  xlvii.  2,  Ixvi.  8,  Ixvii.  4). — The  reason  for  this 
rejoicing  is  the  judgment  through  which  the  Lord  avenges  the 
blood  of  His  servants  and  repays  His  foes.  As  the  enemies  of  God 
are  not  the  heathen  as  such  (see  at  ver.  41),  so  the  servants  of 
Jehovah  are  not  the  nation  of  Israel  as  a  whole,  but  the  faithful 
servants  whom  the  Lord  had  at  all  times  among  His  people,  and 
who  were  persecuted,  oppressed,  and  put  to  death  by  the  ungodly. 
By  this  the  land  was  defiled,  covered  with  blood-guiltiness,  so  that 
the  Lord  was  obliged  to  interpose  as  a  judge,  to  put  an  end  to  the 
ways  of  the  wicked,  and  to  expiate  His  land.  His  people,  i.e.  to 
wipe  out  the  guilt  which  rested  upon  the  land  and  people,  by  the 
punishment  of  the  wicked,  and  the  extermination  of  idolatry  and 
ungodliness,  and  to  sanctify  and  glorify  the  land  and  nation  (yid, 
Isa.  i.  27,  iv.  4,  5). 

In  vers.  44-47  it  is  stated  that  Moses,  with  Joshua,  spake  the 
song  to  the  people ;  and  on  finishing  this  rehearsal,  once  more 
impressed  upon  the  hearts  of  the  people  the  importance  of  observing 
all  the  commandments  of  God.  This  account  proceeds  from  the 
author  of  the  supplement  to  the  TJiorah  of  Moses,  who  inserted 
the  song  in  the  book  of  the  law.  "Phis  explains  the  name  Hoshea,  ■I 
instead  of  JeJwshuah  (Joshua),  which  Moses  had  given  to  his  servant 
(Num.  xiii.  8,  16),  and  invariably  uses  (compare  chap.  xxxi.  3,  7, 
14,  23,  with  chap.  i.  38,  iii.  21,  28,  and  the  exposition  of  Num.  xiii. 
16). — On  ver.  46,  vid.  chap.  vi.  7  and  xi.  19  ;  and  on  ver.  47,  vid.  Ml 
chap.  XXX.  20.  ■I 

Vers.  48-52.  "  That  self-same  day^^  viz.  the  day  upon  which 
Moses  had  rehearsed  the  song  to  the  children  of  Israel,  the  Lord 
renewed  the  announcement  of  his  death,  by  repeating  the  command 
already  given  to  him  (Num.  xxvii.  12-14)  to  ascend  Mount  Nebo, 
there  to  survey  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  then  to  be  gathered  unto 
his  people.  In  form,  this  repetition  differs  from  the  previous 
announcement,  partly  in  the  fact  that  the  situation  of  Mount  Nebo 
is  more  fully  described  (in  the  land  of  Moab,  etc.,  as  in  chap.  i.  5, 
xxviii.  69),  and  partly  in  the  continual  use  of  the  imperative,  and  a 
few  other  trifling  points.  These  differences  may  all  be  explained  from 
the  fact  that  the  account  here  was  not  written  by  Moses  himself. 


Before  ascending  Mount  Nebo  to  depart  this  life,  Moses  took 
leave  of  his  people,  the  tribes  of  Israel,  in  the  blessing  which  is 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  493 

very  fittingly  inserted  in  the  book  of  the  law  between  the  divine 
announcement  of  his  approaching  death  and  the  account  of  the 
death  itself,  as  being  the  last  words  of  the  departing  man  of  God. 
The  blessing  opens  with  an  allusion  to  the  solemn  conclusion  of  the 
covenant  and  giving  of  the  law  at  Sinai,  by  which  the  Lord  became 
King  of  Israel,  to  indicate  at  the  outset  the  source  from  which  all 
blessings  must  flow  to  Israel  (vers.  2-5).  Then  follow  the  separate 
blessings  upon  the  different  tribes  (vers.  6—25).  And  the  whole 
concludes  with  an  utterance  of  praise  to  the  Lord,  as  the  mighty 
support  and  refuge  of  His  people  in  their  conflicts  with  all  their 
foes  (vers.  26-29).  This  blessing  was  not  written  down  by  Moses 
himself,  like  the  song  in  chap,  xxxii.,  but  simply  pronounced  in  the 
presence  of  the  assembled  tribes.  This  is  evident,  not  only  from 
the  fact  that  there  is  nothing  said  about  its  being  committed  to 
writing,  but  also  from  the  heading  in  ver.  1,  where  the  editor 
clearly  distinguishes  himself  from  Moses,  by  speaking  of  Moses  as 
"the  man  of  God,"  like  Caleb  in  Josh.  xiv.  6,  and  the  author  of  the 
heading  to  the  prayer  of  Moses  in  Ps.  xc.  1.  In  later  times,  "man 
of  God"  was  the  title  usually  given  to  a  prophet  (yid.  1  Sam.  ix.  6; 
1  Kings  xii.  22,  xiii.  14,  etc.),  as  a  man  who  enjoyed  direct  inter- 
course with  God,  and  received  supernatural  revelations  from  Him. 
Nevertheless,  we  have  Moses'  own  words,  not  only  in  the  blessings 
upon  the  several  tribes  (vers.  6-25),  but  also  in  the  introduction 
and  conclusion  of  the  blessing  (vers.  2-5  and  26-29).  The  intro 
ductory  words  before  the  blessings,  such  as  "  and  this  for  Judah  " 
in  ver.  7,  "  and  to  Levi  he  said  "  (ver.  8),  and  the  similar  formulas 
in  vers.  12,  13,  18,  20,  22,  23,  and  24,  are  the  only  additions  made 
by  the  editor  who  inserted  the  blessing  in  the  Pentateuch.  The 
arrangement  of  the  blessings  in  their  present  order  is  probably  also 
his  work.  It  neither  accords  with  the  respective  order  of  the  sons 
of  Jacob,  nor  with  the  distribution  of  the  tribes  in  the  camp,  nor 
with  the  situation  of  their  possessions  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  It  is 
true  that  Eeuben  stands  first  as  the  eldest  son  of  Jacob;  but  Simeon 
is  then  passed  over,  and  Judah,  to  whom  the  dying  patriarch  be- 
queathed the  birthright  which  he  withdrew  from  Eeuben,  stands 
next;  and  then  Levi,  the  priestly  tribe.  Then  follow  Benjamin 
and  Joseph,  the  sons  of  Eachel;  Zebulun  and  Issachar,  the  last 
sons  of  Leah  (in  both  cases  the  younger  before  the  elder) ;  and 
lastly,  the  tribes  descended  from  the  sons  of  the  maids :  Gad,  the 
son  of  Zilpah  ;  Dan  and  Naphtali,  the  sons  of  Bilhah  ;  and  finally, 
Asher,  the  second  son  of  Zilpah.     To  discover  the  guiding  prin. 


494  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


ciple  in  this  arrangement,  we  must  look  to  the  blessings  themselves, 
which  indicate  partly  the  position  ^h-eady  obtained  by  eacli  tribe,  as 
a  member  of  the  whole  nation,  in  the  earthly  kingdom  of  God,  and 
partly  the  place  which  it  was  to  reach  and  occupy  in  the  further 
development  of  Israel  in  the  future,  not  only  in  relation  to  the 
Lord,  but  also  in  relation  to  the  other  nations.  The  only  exception  - 
to  this  is  the  position  assigned  to  Reuben,  who  occupies  the  fore-1 
most  place  as  the  first-born,  notwithstanding  his  loss  of  the  birth- 
right. In  accordance  with  this  principle,  the  first  place  properly 
belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Judah,  who  was  raised  into  the  position  of 
lord  over  his  brethren,  and  the  second  to  the  tribe  of  Levi,  which 
had  been  set  apart  to  take  charge  of  the  sacred  things  ;  whilst  Ben- 
jamin is  associated  with  Levi  as  the  "  beloved  of  the  Lord."  Then 
follow  Joseph,  as  the  representative  of  the  might  which  Israel  would 
manifest  in  conflict  with  the  nations  ;  Zebulun  and  Issachar,  as  the 
tribes  which  would  become  the  channels  of  blessings  to  the  nations 
through  their  wealth  in  earthly  good;  and  lastly,  the  tribes  de-JI 
scended  from  the  sons  of  the  maids,  Asher  being  separated  from 
his  brother  Gad,  and  placed  at  the  end,  in  all  probability  simply 
because  it  was  in  the  blessing  promised  to  him  that  the  earthly 
blessedness  of  the  people  of  God  was  to  receive  its  fullest  manifes- 
tation. 

On  comparing  the  blessing  of  Moses  with  that  of  Jacob,  we 
should  expect  at  the  very  outset,  that  if  the  blessings  of  these  two 
men  of  God  have  really  been  preserved  to  us,  and  they  are  not  later 
inventions,  their  contents  would  be  essentially  the  same,  so  that  the 
blessing  of  Moses  would  contain  simply  a  confirmation  of  that  of  the 
dying  patriarch,  and  would  be  founded  upon  it  in  various  ways.   This 
is  most  conspicuous  in  the  blessing  upon  Joseph  ;  but  there  are  also 
several  other  blessings  in  which  it  is  unmistakeable,  although  Moses' 
blessing  is  not  surpassed  in  independence  and  originality  by  that  of 
Jacob,  either  in  its  figures,  its  similes,  or  its  thoughts.     But  the 
resemblance  goes  much  deeper.     It  is  manifest,  for  example,  in  the  fl 
fact,  that  in  the  case  of  several  of  the  tribes,  Moses,  like  Jacob,     - 
does  nothing  more  than  expound  their  names,  and  on  the  ground  of 
the  peculiar  characters  expressed  in  the  names,  foretell  to  the  tribes  fl 
themselves  their  peculiar  calling   and  future  development  within 
the  covenant  nation.     Consequently  we  have  nowhere  any  special     ' 
predictions,  but  simply  prophetic  glances  at  the  future,  depicted  in  fl 
a  purely  ideal  manner,  whilst  in  the  case  of  most  of  the  tribes  the 
utter  want  of  precise  information  concerning  their  future  history 


II 


I 


CHAP,  xxxiii.  495 

prevents  us  from  showing  in  what  way  they  were  fulfilled.  The 
difference  in  the  times  at  which  the  two  blessings  were  uttered  is 
also  very  apparent.  The  existing  circumstances  from  w^hich  Moses 
surveyed  the  future  history  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  in  the  light  of 
divine  revelation,  were  greatly  altered  from  the  time  when  Jacob 
blessed  the  heads  of  the  twelve  tribes  before  his  death,  in  the  per- 
sons of  his  twelve  sons.  These  tribes  had  now  grown  into  a  nume- 
rous people,  with  which  the  Lord  had  established  the  covenant  that 
He  had  made  with  the  patriarchs.  The  curse  of  dispersion  in  Israel, 
which  the  patriarch  had  pronounced  upon  Simeon  and  Levi  (Gen. 
xlix.  5-7),  had  been  changed  into  a  blessing  so  far  as  Levi  was  con- 
cerned. The  tribe  of  Levi  had  been  entrusted  with  the  "  light  and 
right "  of  the  Lord,  had  been  called  to  be  the  teacher  of  the  rights 
and  law  of  God  in  Israel,  because  it  had  preserved  the  covenant  of 
the  Lord,  after  the  conclusion  of  the  covenant  at  Sinai,  even  though 
it  involved  the  denial  of  flesh  and  bloo'd.  Reuben,  Gad,  and  half 
Manasseh  had  already  received  their  inheritance,  and  the  other 
tribes  were  to  take  possession  of  Canaan  immediately.  These  cir- 
cumstances formed  the  starting-point  for  the  blessings  of  Moses, 
not  only  in  the  case  of  Levi  and  Gad,  where  they  are  expressly 
mentioned,  but  in  that  of  the  other  tribes  also,  where  they  do  not 
stand  prominently  forward,  because  for  the  most  part  Moses  simply 
repeats  the  leading  features  of  their  future  development  in  their 
promised  inheritance,  as  already  indicated  in  the  blessing  of  Jacob, 
and  "  thus  bore  his  testimony  to  the  patriarch  who  anticipated  him, 
that  the  spirit  of  his  prophecy  was  truth"  (Ziegler,  p.  159). 

In  this  peculiar  characteristic  of  the  blessing  of  Moses,  we  have 
the  strongest  proof  of  its  authenticity,  particularly  in  the  fact  that 
there  is  not  the  slightest  trace  of  the  historical  circumstances  of 
the  nation  at  large  and  the  separate  tribes  which  were  peculiar  to 
the  post-Mosaic  times.  The  little  ground  that  there  is  for  the 
assertion  which  Knohel  repeats,  that  the  blessing  betrays  a  closer 
acquaintance  wdth  the  post-Mosaic  times,  such  as  Moses  himself 
could  not  possibly  have  possessed,  is  sufficiently  evident  from  the 
totallv  different  expositions  which  have  been  given  by  the  different 
commentators  of  the  saying  concerning  Judah  in  ver.  7,  which  is 
adduced  in  proof  of  this.  Whilst  Knobel  finds  the  desire  expressed 
in  this  verse  on  behalf  of  Judah,  that  David,  wha  had  fled  from 
Saul,  might  return,  obtain  possession  of  the  government,  and  raise 
his  tribe  into  the  royal  tribe,  Graf  imagines  that  it  expresses  the 
longing  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  for  reunion  with  that  of  Israel ; 


490  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


\ 


I 


and  Ilofmann  and  Maurev  even  trace  an  allusion  to  the  luliabltauts 
of  Judea  who  were  led  into  captivity  along  with  Jehoiachin  :  one 
assumption  being  just  as  arbitrary  and  as  much  opposed  to  the  text 
as  the  other. — All  the  objections  brought  against  the  genuineness  ■■ 
of  this  blessing  are  founded  upon  an  oversight  or  denial  of  its  pro- 
phetic character,  and  upon  untenable  interpretations  of  particular 
expressions  abstracted  from  it.  Not  only  is  there  no  such  thing  in 
the  whole  blessing  as  a  distinct  reference  to  the  peculiar  historical 
circumstances  of  Israel  which  arose  after  Moses'  death,  but  there 
are  some  points  in  the  picture  which  Moses  has  drawn  of  the  tribes 
that  it  is  impossible  to  recognise  in  these  circumstances.  Even 
Knohel  from  his  naturalistic  stand-point  is  obliged  to  admit,  that  no 
traces  can  be  found  in  the  song  of  any  allusion  to  the  calamities 
which  fell  upon  the  nation  in  the  Syrian,  Assyrian,  and  Chaldasan 
periods.  And  hitherto  it  has  proved  equally  impossible  to  point  out 
any  distinct  allusion  to  the  circumstances  of  the  nation  in  the  period 
of  the  judges.  On  the  contrary,  as  Schultz  observes,  the  speaker 
rises  throughout  to  a  height  of  ideality  which  it  would  have  been  no 
longer  possible  for  any  sacred  author  to  reach,  when  the  confusions 
and  divisions  of  a  later  age  had  actually  taken  place.  He  sees 
nothing  of  the  calamities  from  without,  which  fell  upon  the  nation 
again  and  again  with  destructive  fury,  nothing  of  the  Canaanites 
who  still  remained  in  the  midst  of  the  Israelites,  and  nothing  of  the 
hostility  of  the  different  tribes  towards  one  another ;  he  simply  sees 
how  they  work  together  in  the  most  perfect  harmony,  each  contri- 
buting his  part  to  realize  the  lofty  ideal  of  Israel.  And  again  he 
grasps  this  ideal  and  the  realization  of  it  in  so  elementary  a  way, 
and  so  thoroughly  from  the  outer  side,  without  regard  to  any 
inward  transformation  and  glorification,  that  he  must  have  lived  in 
a  time  preceding  the  prophetic  age,  and  before  the  moral  conflicts 
had  taken  place. 

Vers.  2-5.  In  the  introduction  Moses  depicts  the  elevation  of 
Israel  into  the  nation  of  God,  in  its  origin  (ver.  2),  its  nature 
(ver.  3),  its  intention  and  its  goal  (vers.  4,  5). — Ver.  2.  "  Jehovah 
came  from  Sinai,  and  rose  up  from  Seir  unto  them ;  He  shone  from, 
the  mountains  of  Paran,  and  came  out  of  holy  myriads,  at  Sis  right 
rays  of  fire  to  themP  To  set  forth  the  glory  of  the  covenant 
which  God  made  with  Israel,  Moses  depicts  the  majesty  and  glory 
in  which  the  Lord  appeared  to  the  Israelites  at  Sinai,  to  give  them 
the  law,  and  become  their  king.  The  three  clauses,  "  Jehovah 
came  from  Sinai . . .  from  Seir  . . .  from  the  mountains  of  Paran,"  do 


I 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  2-5.  497 

not  refer  to  different  manifestations  of  God  (Knohel),  but  to  the  one 
appearance  of  God  at  Sinai.  Like  the  sun  when  it  rises,  and  fills 
the  whole  of  the  broad  horizon  with  its  beams,  the  glory  of  the 
Lord,  when  He  appeared,  was  not  confined  to  one  single  point,  but 
shone  upon  the  people  of  Israel  from  Sinai,  and  Seir,  and  the 
mountains  of  Paran,  as  they  came  from  the  west  to  Sinai.  The 
Lord  appeared  to  the  people  from  the  summit  of  Sinai,  as  they  lay 
encamped  at  the  foot  of  the  mountain.  This  appearance  rose  like  a 
streaming  light  from  Seir,  and  shone  at  the  same  time  from  the 
mountains  of  Paran.  Seii'  is  the  mountain  land  of  the  Edomites  to 
the  east  of  Sinai ;  and  the  mountains  of  Paran  are  in  all  probability 
not  the  mountains  of  et-Tih,  which  form  the  southern  boundary  of 
the  desert  of  Paran,  but  rather  the  mountains  of  the  Azazimeh, 
which  ascend  to  a  great  height  above  Kadesh,  and  form  the  boundary 
wall  of  Canaan  towards  the  south.  The  glory  of  the  Lord,  who 
appeared  upon  Sinai,  sent  its  beams  even  to  the  eastern  and  northern 
extremities  of  the  desert.  This  manifestation  of  God  formed  the 
basis  for  all  subsequent  manifestations  of  the  omnipotence  and  grace 
of  the  Lord  for  the  salvation  of  His  people.  This  explains  the 
allusions  to  the  description  before  us  in  the  song  of  Deborah  ( Judg. 
V.  4)  and  in  Hab.  iii.  3. — The  Lord  came  not  only  from  Sinai,  but 
from  heaven,  "  out  of  holy  myriads,"  i.e,  out  of  the  midst  of  the 
thousands  of  holy  angels  who  surround  His  throne  (1  Kings  xxii. 
19 ;  Job  i.  6  ;  Dan.  vii.  10),  and  who  are  introduced  in  Gen.  xxviii. 
12  as  His  holy  servants,  and  in  Gen.  xxxii.  2,  3,  as  the  hosts  of  God, 
and  form  the  assembly  of  holy  ones  around  His  throne  (Ps.  Ixxxix. 
6,  8 ;  cf.  Ps.  Ixviii.  18  ;  Zech.  xiv.  5 ;  Matt.  xxvi.  53  ;  Heb.  xii.  22 ; 
Kev.  v.  11,  vii.  11). — The  last  clause  is  a  difficult  one.  The  writing 
m  \i;v^  in  two  words,  "  fire  of  the  law,"  not  only  fails  to  give  a  suit- 
able sense,  but  has  against  it  the  fact  that  rrn,  law,  edictum,  is  not 
even  a  Semitic  word,  but  was  adopted  from  the  Persian  into  the 
Chaldee,  and  that  it  is  only  by  Gentiles  that  it  is  ever  applied  to  the 
law  of  God  (Ezra  vii.  12,  21,  25,  26  ;  Dan.  vi.  6).  It  must  be  read 
as  one  word,  m^i^,  as  it  is  in  many  MSS.  and  editions, — not,  how- 
ever, as  connected  with  *ltJ^*Nt,  HinK^K,  the  pouring  out  of  the  brooks, 
slopes  of  the  mountains  (Num.  xxi.  15),  but  in  the  form  niK'J^,  com- 
posed, according  to  the  probable  conjecture  of  BottcJier,  of  ^^^  fire, 
and  nn^  (in  the  Chaldee  and  Syriac),  to  throw,  to  shoot  arrows,  in 
the  sense  of  "  fire  of  throwing,"  shooting  fire,  a  figurative  descrip- 
tion of  the  flashes  of  lightning.  Gesenius  adopts  this  explanation, 
except  that  he  derives  m  from  HT,  to  throw.     It  is  favoured  by  the 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  2  I 


498  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


fact  tliat,  according  to  Ex.  xix.  16,  the  appearance  of  God  upon 
Sinai  was  accompanied  by  thunder  and  lightning ;  and  flashes  of 
lightning  are  often  called  the  arrows  of  God,  whilst  HT^^  in  Hebrew, 
is  established  by  the  name  "•^^''l^  (Num.  i.  5,  ii.  10).  To  this  we 
may  add  the  parallel  passage,  Hab.  iii.  4,  "  rays  out  of  His  hand,^' 
which  renders  this  explanation  a  very  probable  one.  By  "  them,"  j^ 
in  the  second  and  fifth  clauses,  the  Israelites  are  intended,  to  H 
whom  this  fearful  theophany  referred.  On  the  signification  of  the 
manifestation  of  God  in  fire,  see  chap.  iv.  11,  and  the  exposition  of 
Ex.  iii.  2. 

Ver.  3.  "  Yea^  nations  He  loves ;  all  His  holy  ones  are  in  Thy . 
hand :  and  they  lie  down  at  Thy  feet ;  they  rise  up  at  Thy  wordsJ* 
D"'Dj;  Dnh  is  the  subject  placed  first  absolutely :  "  nations  loving," 
sc.  is  he ;  or  "  as  loving  nations — all  Thy  holy  ones  are  in  Thy 
hand."     The  nations  or  peoples  are  not  the  tribes  of  Israel  here, 
any  more  than  in  chap,  xxxii.  8,  or  Gen.  xxviii.  3,  xxxv.  11,  and 
xlviii.  4 ;    whilst  Judg.  v.  14  and  Hos.  x.  14  cannot   come  into  fll 
consideration  at  all,  for  there  the  word  is  defined  by  a  suffix.     The 
meaning  of  the  words  depends  upon  whether  "  all  His  holy  ones"    __ 
are  the  godly  in  Israel,  or  the  Israelites  generally,  or  the  angels.  11 
There  is  nothing  to  favour  the  first  explanation,  as  the  distinction 
between  the  godly  and  the  wicked  would  be  out  of  place  in  the    — . 
introduction  to  a  blessing  upon  all  the  tribes.    The  second  has  only  f  | 
a  seeming  support  in  Dan.  vii.  21  sqq.  and  Ex.  xix.  6.     It  does  not 
follow  at  once  from  the  calling  of  Israel  to  be  the  holy  nation  of 
Jehovah,  that  all  the  Israelites  were  or  could  be  called  "  holy  ones 
of  the  Lord."      Least  of  all  should  Num.  xvi.  3  be  adduced  in 
support  of  this.     Even  in  Dan.  vii.  the  holy  ones  of  the  Most  High 
are  not  the  Jews  generally,  but  simply  the  godly,  or  believers,  in  the 
nation  of  God.     The  third  view,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  perfectly 
natural  one,  on  account  of  the  previous  reference  to  the  holy  myriads. 
The  meaning,  therefore,  would  be  this :  The  Lord  embraces  all 
nations  with  His  love.  He  who,  so  to  speak,  has  all  His  holy  angels  fl 
in  His  hand,  i.e.  His  power,  so  that  they  serve  Him  as  their  Lord. 
They  lie  down  at  His  feet.      The  air,  Xey.  12^  is  explained  by 
Kimchi  and  Saad.  as  signifying  adjuncti  sequuntur  vestigia  sua ;  and 
by  the  Syriac,  They  follow  thy  foot,  from  conjecture  rather  than  any 
certain  etymology.     The  derivation  proposed  by  modern  linguists, 
from  the  verb  HDPij  according  to  an  Arabic  word  signifying  recubuit, 
Innixus  est,  has  apparently  more  to  support  it.     K^^,  it  rises  up  :  in- 
transitive, as  in  Hab.  i.  3,  Nah.  i.  5,  Hos.  xiii.  1,  and  Ps.  Ixxxix.  10. 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  2-5.  499 

^^nin'np  is  not  a  Hithpael  participle  (that  which  is  spoken)  ;  for  "iB'njD 
lias  not  a  passive,  but  an  active  signification,  to  converse  (Num.  vii. 
80  ;  Ezek.  ii.  2,  etc.).  It  is  rather  a  noun,  niHlj  from  nnn'ij  words, 
utterances.  The  singular,  ^5|'^,  is  distributive :  every  one  (of  them) 
rises  on  account  of  thine  utterances,  i.e.  at  thy  words.  The  suffixes 
relate  to  God,  and  the  discourse  passes  from  the  third  to  the  second 
person.  In  our  own  language,  such  a  change  in  a  sentence  like 
this,  "  all  His  (God's)  holy  ones  are  in  Thy  (God's)  hand,"  would 
be  intolerably  harsh,  but  in  Hebrew  poetry  it  is  by  no  means  rare 
(see,  for  example,  Ps.  xlix.  19). 

Vers.  4,  5.  "  Moses  appointed  us  a  law,  a  possession  of  the  congre- 
gation of  Jacob.  And  He  became  King  in  lighteous-nation  (Jeshurun) ; 
there  the  heads  of  the  people  assembled,  in  crowds  the  tribes  of  Israeli 
The  God  who  met  Israel  at  Sinai  in  terrible  majesty,  out  of  the 
myriads  of  holy  angels,  who  embraces  all  nations  in  love,  and  has 
all  the  holy  angels  in  His  power,  so  that  they  lie  at  His  feet  and 
rise  up  at  His  word,  gave  the  law  through  Moses  to  the  congrega- 
tion of  Jacob  as  a  precious  possession,  and  became  King  in  Israel. 
This  was  the  object  of  the  glorious  manifestation  of  His  holy 
majesty  upon  Sinai.  Instead  of  saying,  "  He  gave  the  law^  to 
the  tribes  of  Israel  through  my  mediation,"  Moses  personates  the 
listening  nation,  and  not  only  speaks  of  himself  in  the  third  per- 
son, but  does  so  by  identifying  his  own  person  with  the  nation, 
because  he  wished  the  people  to  repeat  his  words  from  thorough 
conviction,  and  because  the  law  which  he  gave  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord  was  given  to  himself  as  well,  and  was  as  binding  upon  him 
as  upon  every  other  member  of  the  congregation.  In  a  similar 
manner  the  prophet  Habakkuk  identifies  himself  with  the  nation  in 
chap,  iii.,  and  says  in  ver.  19,  out  of  the  heart  of  the  nation,  "  The 
Lord  is  my  strength,  .  .  .  who  maketh  me  to  walk  upon  mine  high 
places," — an  expression  which  did  not  apply  to  himself,  but  to  the 
nation  as  a  whole.  So  again  in  the  20th  and  21st  Psalms,  which 
David  composed  as  the  prayers  of  the  nation  for  its  king,  he  not 
only  speaks  of  himself  as  the  anointed  of  the  Lord,  but  addresses 
such  prayers  to  the  Lord  for  himself  as  could  only  be  offered  by 
the  nation  for  its  king.  "  A  possession  for  the  congregation  of 
tlacob."  "  Israel  was  distinguished  above  all  other  nations  by  the 
possession  of  the  divinely  revealed  law  (chap.  iv.  5-8)  ;  that  was  its 
most  glorious  possession,  and  therefore  is  called  its  true  KeL/jbrjktov''^ 
(Knobel).  The  subject  in  ver.  5  is  not  Moses  but  Jehovah,  w^ho 
became  King  in  Jeshurun  (see  at  chap,  xxxii.  15  and  Ex.  xv.  18). 


500  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


I 


"  Were  gathered  together ;"  this  refers  to  the  assembling  of  the 
nation  around  Sinai  (chap.  iv.  10  sqq. ;  cf.  Ex.  xix.  17  sqq.),  to  the 
day  of  assembly  (chap.  ix.  10,  x.  4,  xviii.  16). 

Ver.  6.  The   blessings  upon   the   tribes   commence  with  this 
verse.     ''Let  Reuben  live   and  not  die,  and  there  he  a  (small) 
number  of  his  inenJ*     The  rights  of  the  first-born  had  been  with- 
held from  Reuben  in  the  blessing  of  Jacob  (Gen.  xlix.  3) ;  Moses,      i 
however,   promises   this  tribe   continuance   and   prosperity.     TheSi 
words,  "  and  let  his  men  become  a  number,"  have  been  explained 
in  very  different  ways.     "iSpp  in  this  connection  cannot  mean  a 
large  number  (ttoXu?  ip  apLdfio),  LXX.),  but,  like  "iSpp  '•np  (chap, 
iv.  27 ;  Gen.  xxxiv.  30 ;  Jer.  xliv.  28),  simply  a  small  number,  that 
could  easily  be  counted  (cf.  chap,  xxviii.  G2).     The  negation  must 
be  carried  on  to  the  last  clause.     This  the  language  will  allow,  as 
the  rule  that  a  negation  can  only  be  carried  forward  when  it  stands 
with  emphatic  force  at  the  very  beginning  {Ewald,  §  351)  is  not 
without  exceptions ;  see  for  example  Prov.  xxx.  2,  3,  where  three 
negative  clauses  follow  a  positive  one,  and  in  the  last  the  ^  is 
omitted,  without  the  particle  of  negation  having  been  placed  in 
any  significant  manner  at  the  beginning. — Simeon  was  the  next  in 
age  to  Reuben ;  but  he  is  passed  over  entirely,  because  according 
to  Jacob's  blessing  (Gen.  xlix.  7)  he  was  to  be  scattered  abroad  in 
Israel,  and  lost  his  individuality  as  a  tribe  in  consequence  of  this 
dispersion,  in  accordance  with  which  the  Simeonites  simply  received 
a  number  of  towns  within  the  territory  of  Judah  (Josh.  xix.  2-9), 
and,  "  having  no  peculiar  object  of  its  own,  took  part,  as  far  as 
possible,  in  the  fate  and  objects  of  the  other  tribes,  more  especially  ■I 
of  Judah "  (^Schultz).     Although,  therefore,  it  is  by  no  means  to 
be  regarded  as  left  without  a  blessing,  but  rather  as  included  in 
the  general  blessings  in  vers.   1  and  29,  and  still  more  in  thell 
blessing  upon  Judah,  yet  it  could  not  receive  a  special  blessing 
like  the  tribe  of  Reuben,  because,  as  Ephraem  Syrus  observes,  the  _- 
Simeonites  had  not  endeavoured  to  wipe  out  the  stain  of  the  crime  11 
which  Jacob  cursed,  but  had  added  to  it  by  fresh  crimes  (more 
especially  the  audacious  prostitution  of  Zimri,  Num.  xxv.).     Even  — - 
the  Simeonites  did  not  become  extinct,  but  continued  to  live  in  the  ^  | 
midst  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  so  that  as  late  as  the  eighth  century,  in 
the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  thirteen  princes  are  enumerated  with  their 
families,  whose  fathers'  houses  had  increased  greatly  (1  Chron.  iv. 
34  sqq.)  ;  and  these  families  effected  conquests  in  the  south,  even! 
penetrating  into  the  mountains  of  Seir,  for  the  purpose  of  seekingj 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  7-11.  501 

fresh  pasture  (1  Chron.  iv.  39-43).  Hence  the  assertion  that  the 
omission  of  Simeon  is  only  conceivable  from  the  circumstances  of 
a  later  age,  is  as  mistaken  as  the  attempt  made  in  some  of  the 
MSS.  of  the  Septuagint  to  interpolate  the  name  of  Simeon  in  the 
second  clause  of  ver.  6. 

Yer.  7.  The  blessing  upon  Judah  is  introduced  with  the 
formula,  ''And  this  for  Judah,  and  he  said:^^  ''Hear,  Jehovah,  the 
voice  of  Judah,  and  bring  him  to  his  people ;  with  his  hands  he  fights 
for  him;  and  help  against  his  adversaries  wilt  Thou  heP  Judah, 
from  whom  the  sceptre  was  not  to  depart  (Gen.  xlix.  10),  is  men- 
tioned before  Levi  as  the  royal  tribe.  The  prayer.  May  Jehovah 
bring  Judah  to  his  people,  can  hardly  be  understood  in  any  other 
way  than  it  is  by  Onkelos  and  Hengstenherg  (Christol.  i.  80), 
viz.  as  founded  upon  the  blessing  of  Jacob,  and  expressing  the 
desire,  that  as  Judah  was  to  lead  the  way  as  the  champion  of  his 
brethren  in  the  wars  of  Israel  against  the  nations,  he  might  have  a 
prosperous  return  to  his  people ;  for  the  thought,  "  introduce  him 
to  the  kingdom  of  Israel  and  Judah  "  {Luther),  or  "  give  up  to  him 
the  people  which  belongs  to  him  according  to  Thine  appointment " 
{Schultz),  is  hardly  implied  in  the  words,  "bring  to  his  people." 
Other  explanations  are  not  worth  mentioning.  What  follows  points 
to  strife  and  war :  "  With  his  hands  (VT  accusative  of  the  instru- 
ment, vid,  Ges.  §  138,  1,  note  3 ;  Ewald,  §  283,  a.)  is  he  fighting 
(2";  participle  of  l^n)  for  it  (the  nation)  ;  Thou  wilt  grant  him  help, 
deliverance  before  his  foes." 

Vers.  8-11.  Levi.— Vers.  8,  9.  "  Thy  right  and  Thy  light  is  to 
Thy  godly  man,  whom  Thou  didst  prove  in  Massah,  and  didst  strive 
with  him  at  the  water  of  stmfe;  who  says  to  his  father  and  his  mother, 
I  see  him  not ;  and  does  not  regard  his  brethren,  and  does  not  Jcnow 
his  sons:  for  they  observed  Thy  word,  and  hept  Thy  covenant^  This 
blessing  is  also  addressed  to  God  as  a  prayer.  The  Urim  and 
Thummim — that  pledge,  which  the  high  priest  wore  upon  his  breast- 
plate, that  the  Lord  would  always  give  His  people  light  to  preserve 
His  endangered  right  (vid.  Ex.  xxviii.  29,  30) — are  here  regarded 
as  a  prerogative  of  the  whole  of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  Thummim  is 
placed  before  Urim,  to  indicate  at  the  outset  that  Levi  had  de- 
fended the  right  of  the  Lord,  and  that  for  that  very  reason  the 
right  of  the  Urim  and  Thummim  had  been  given,  to  him  by  the 
Lord.  "  Thy  holy  one "  is  not  Aaron,  but  Levi  the  tribe-father, 
who  represents  the  whole  tribe  to  which  the  blessing  applies;  hence 
in  vers.  96  and  10  the  verb  passes  into  the  plural.     To  define  more 


502  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 


precisely  the  expression  "  Thy  holy  one,"  reference  is  made  to  the 
trials  at  Massah  and  at  the  water  of  strife,  on  the  principle  that  the 
Lord  humbles  His  servants  before  He  exalts  them,  and  confirms 
those  that  are  His  by  trying  and  proving  them.  The  proving 
at  Massah  refers  to  the  murmuring  of  the  people  on  account  of 
the  want  of  water  at  Rephidim  (Ex.  xvii.  1-7,  as  in  chap.  vi.  16 
and  ix.  22),  from  which  the  place  received  the  name  of  Massah 
and  Meribah ;  the  striving  at  the  water  of  strife,  to  the  rebellion  of 
the  people  against  Moses  and  Aaron  on  account  of  the  want  of 
water  at  Kadesh  (Num.  xx.  1-13).  At  both  places  it  was  primarily 
the  people  who  strove  with  Moses  and  Aaron,  and  thereby  tempted 
God.  For  it  is  evident  that  even  at  Massah  the  people  murmured 
not  only  against  Moses,  but  against  their  leaders  generally,  from 
the  use  of  the  plural  verb,  "  Give  ye  us  water  to  drink  "  (Ex.  xvii. 
2).  This  proving  of  the  people,  however,  was  at  the  same  time  a 
proof,  to  which  the  Lord  subjected  the  heads  and  leaders  of  the 
nation,  for  the  purpose  of  trying  their  faith.  And  thus  also,  in 
chap.  viii.  2  sqq.,  the  whole  of  the  guidance  of  Israel  through  the 
desert  is  described  as  a  trial  and  humiliation  of  the  people  by  the 
Lord.  But  in  Moses  and  Aaron,  the  heads  of  the  tribe  of  Levies  I 
the  whole  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  was  proved.  The  two  provings  by 
means  of  water  are  selected,  as  Schultz  observes,  "  because  in  their 
correlation  they  were  the  best  adapted  to  represent  the  beginning 
and  end,  and  therefore  the  whole  of  the  temptations." — Yer.  9.  In 
these  temptations  Levi  had  proved  itself  "  a  holy  one,"  although  in 
the  latter  Moses  and  Aaron  stumbled,  since  the  Levites  had  risen 
up  in  defence  of  the  honour  of  the  Lord  and  had  kept  His  cove- 
nant, even  with  the  denial  of  father,  mother,  brethren,  and  children 
(Matt.  X.  37,  xix.  29).  The  words,  "who  says  to  his  father,"  etc., 
relate  to  the  event  narrated  in  Ex.  xxxii.  26-29,  where  the  Levites 
draw  their  swords  against  the  Israelites  their  brethren,  at  the  com- 
mand of  Moses,  after  the  worship  of  the  golden  calf,  and  execute 
judgment  upon  the  nation  without  respect  of  person.  To  this  we 
may  add  Num.  xxv.  8,  where  Phinehas  interposes  with  his  sword  in 
defence  of  the  honour  of  the  Lord  against  the  shameless  prostitu- 
tion with  the  daughters  of  Moab.  On  these  occasions  the  Levites  fl  I 
manifested  the  spirit  which  Moses  predicates  here  of  all  the  tribe.  ■ 
By  the  interposition  at  Sinai  especially,  they  devoted  themselves  7 , 
with  such  self-denial  to  the  service  of  the  Lord,  that  the  dignity  of  ■ 
the  priesthood  was  conferred  upon  their  tribe  in  consequence. — In 
vers.  10  and  11,  Moses  celebrates  this  vocation  :  "  They  will  teach 


I 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  12.  '  503 

Jacob  Thy  rights^  and  Israel  Thy  law;  bring  incense  to  Thy  nose,  and 
zvhole-offering  upon  Thine  altar.  Bless,  Lord,  his  strength,  and  let 
the  work  of  his  harids  be  lo ell-pleasing  to  Thee :  smite  his  adversaries 
and  his  haters  upon  the  hips,  that  they  may  not  rise  .'"  The  tribe  of 
Levi  had  received  the  high  and  glorious  calling  to  instruct  Israel 
in  the  rights  and  commandments  of  God  (Lev.  x.  11),  and  to  pre- 
sent the  sacrifices  of  the  people  to  the  Lord,  viz.  incense  in  the 
holy  place,  whole-offering  in  the  court.  "  Whole-offering,"  a  term 
applied  to  the  burnt-offering  (see  vol.  ii.  p.  291),  which  is  men- 
tioned instar  omnium  as  being  the  leading  sacrifice.  The  priests 
alone  were  actually  entrusted  with  the  instruction  of  the  people  in 
the  law  and  the  sacrificial  worship ;  but  as  the  rest  of  the  Levites 
were  given  them  as  assistants  in  their  service,  this  service  might 
very  properly  be  ascribed  to  the  whole  tribe ;  and  no  greater  bless- 
ing could  be  desired  for  it  than  that  the  Lord  should  give  them 
power  to  discharge  the  duties  of  their  office,  should  accept  their 
service  with  favour,  and  make  their  opponents  powerless.  The 
enemies  and  haters  of  Levi  were  not  only  envious  persons,  like 
Korali  and  his  company  (Num.  xvi.  1),  but  all  opponents  of  the 
priests  and  Levites.  The  loins  are  the  seat  of  strength  (Ps.  Ixix. 
24;  Job  xl.  16  ;  Prov.  xxxi.  17).  This  is  the  only  place  in  which 
\0  is  used  before  a  finite  verb,  whereas  it  often  stands  before  the 
infinitive  (e.g.  Gen.  xxvii.  1,  xxxi.  29). 

Ver.  12.  Benjamin. — "  The  beloved  of  the  Lord  will  dwell 
safely  with  Him ;  He  shelters  him  at  all  times,  and  he  dwells  between 
His  shoulders!^  Benjamin,  the  son  of  prosperity,  and  beloved  of 
his  father  (Gen.  xxxv.  18,  xliv.  20),  should  bear  his  name  with 
right.  He  would  be  the  beloved  of  the  Lord,  and  as  such  would 
dwell  in  safety  with  the  Lord  (V^y,  lit.  founded  upon  Him).  The 
Lord  would  shelter  him  continually.  The  participle  expresses  the 
permanence  of  the  relation :  is  his  shelterer.  In  the  third  clause 
Benjamin  is  the  subject  once  more ;  he  dwells  between  the  shoulders 
of  Jehovah.  ^'Between  the  shoulders"  is  equivalent  to  "upon  the 
back"  (yid.  1  Sam.  xvii.  6).  The  expression  is  founded  upon  the 
ficTure  of  a  father  carrying  his  son  (chap.  i.  29).  This  figure  is  by 
no  means  so  bold  as  that  of  the  eagle's  wings,  upon  which  the  Lord 
had  carried  His  people,  and  brought  them  to  Himself  (Ex.  xix.  4 ; 
vid.  Deut.  xxxii.  11).  There  is  nothing  strange  in  the  change  of 
subject  in  all  three  clauses,  since  it  is  met  with  repeatedly  even  in 
plain  prose  {e.g.  2  Sam.  xi.  13)  ;  and  here  it  follows  simply  enough 
from  the  thoughts  contained  in  the  different  clauses,  whilst  the 


504  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

suffix  in  all  three  clauses  refers  to  the  same  noun,  i.e.  to  Jehovah.^ 
There  are  some  who  regard  Jehovah  as  the  subject  in  the  third 
clause,  and  explain  the  unheard-of  figure  which  they  thus  obtain, 
viz.  that  of  Jehovah  dwelling  between  the  shoulders  of  Benjamin, 
as  referring  to  the  historical  fact  that  God  dwelt  in  the  temple  at 
Jerusalem,  which  was  situated  upon  the  border  of  the  tribes  of 
Benjamin  and  Judah.  To  this  application  of  the  words  Knohel 
has  properly  objected,  that  God  did  not  dwell  between  ridges 
(=  shoulders)  of  mountains  there,  but  upon  the  top  of  Moriah; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  he  has  set  up  the  much  more  untenable 
hypothesis,  that  the  expression  refers  to  Gibeon,  where  the  taber- 
nacle stood  after  the  destruction  of  Nob  by  Saul. — Moreover,  the 
whole  nation  participated  in  the  blessing  which  Moses  desired  for 
Benjamin ;  and  this  applies  to  the  blessings  of  the  other  tribes  also. 
All  Israel  was,  like  Benjamin,  the  beloved  of  the  Lord  {yid,  Jer. 
xi.  15 ;  Ps.  Ix.  7),  and  dwelt  with  Him  in  safety  {yid.  ver.  28). 

Vers.  13-17.  Joseph. — Ver.  13.  ^^  Blessed  of  the  Lord  he  his 
landy  of  (in)  the  most  precious  things  of  heaven^  the  de^v,  and  of 
the  flood  which  lies  beneath,  (ver.  14)  and  of  the  most  precious  of 
the  produce  of  the  sun,  and  of  the  most  precious  of  the  growth  of  the 
moons,  (ver.  15)  and  of  the  head  of  the  mountains  of  olden  time,  and 
of  the  most  precious  thing  of  the  everlasting  hills,  (ver.  16)  and  of 
the  most  precious  thing  of  the  earth,  and  of  its  fulness,  and  the  good- 
will of  Him  that  dwelt  in  the  hush :  let  it  come  upon  the  head  of 
Joseph,  and  upon  the  crown  of  him  that  is  illustmous  among  his 
brethren^  What  Jacob  desired  and  solicited  for  his  son  Joseph, 
Moses  also  desires  for  this  tribe,  namely,  the  greatest  possible  abun- 
dance of  earthly  blessing,  and  a  vigorous  manifestation  of  power  in 
conflict  with  the  nations.  But  however  unmistakeable  may  be  the 
connection  between  these  words  and  the  blessing  of  Jacob  (Gen. 
xlix.  22  sqq.),  not  only  in  the  things  desired,  but  even  in  particular 
expressions,  there  is  an  important  difference  which  equally  strikes 
us,  namely,  that  in  the  case  of  Jacob  the  main  point  of  the  blessing 
is  the  growth  of  Joseph  into  a  powerful  tribe,  whereas  with  Moses 
it  is  the  development  of  power  on  the  part  of  this  tribe  in  the  land 
of  its  inheritance,  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  different  times  at 
which  the  blessings  were  pronounced.  Jacob  described  the  growth 
of  Joseph  under  the  figure  of  the  luxuriant  branch  of  a  fruit-tree 

^  "  To  dwell  upon  God  and  between  His  shoulders  is  the  same  as  to  repose 
upon  Him  :  the  simile  being  taken  from  fathers  who  carry  their  sons  Avhile  deli- 
cate and  young"  (Calvin). 


I 


CHAP.  XXXIir.  13-17.  505 

planted  by  the  water ;  whilst  Moses  fixes  his  eye  primarily  upon 
the  land  of  Joseph,  and  desires  for  him  the  richest  productions. 
"  May  his  land  be  blessed  by  Jehovah  from  (jp  of  the  cause  of  the 
blessing,  whose  author  was  Jehovah ;  vid.  Ps.  xxviii.  7,  civ.  3)  the 
most  precious  thing  of  the  heaven."     ^pp,  which  only  occurs  again 
in  the  Song  of  Sol.  iv.  13,  16,  and  vii.  14,  is  applied  to  precious 
fruits.     The  most  precious  fruit  which  the  heaven  yields  to  the 
land  is  the  dew.     The  "  productions  of  the  sun,"  and  K^']3,  air.  Xey. 
from  Kn3,  "  the  produce  of  the  moons,"  are  the  fruits  of  the  earth, 
which  are  matured  by  the  influence  of  the  sun  and  moon,  by  their 
light,  their  warmth.     At  the  same  time,  we  can  hardly  so  distin- 
guish the  one  from  the  other  as  to  understand  by  the  former  the 
fruits  which  ripen  only  once  a  year,  and  by  the  latter  those  which 
grow  several  times  and  in  different  months;  and  Ezek.  xlvii.  12 
and  Rev.  xxii.  2  cannot  be  adduced  as  proofs  of  this.   The  plural 
"  7720ons"  in  parallelism  with  the  sun  does  not  mean  months,  as  in 
Ex.  ii.  2,  but  the  different  phases  which  the  moon  shows  in  its 
revolution  round  the  earth.     E^«iO  (from  the  head),  in  ver.  15,  is  a 
contracted  expression  signifying  "  from  the  most  precious  things  of 
the  head."     The  most  precious  things  of  the  head  of  the  mountains 
of  old  and  the  eternal  hills,  are  the  crops  and  forests  with  which  the 
tops  of  the  mountains  and  hills  are  covered.     Moses  sums  up  the 
whole  in  the  words,  "the  earth,  and  the  fulness  thereof:"  every- 
thing in  the  form  of  costly  good  that  the  earth  and  its  productions 
can  supply. — To  the  blessings  of  the  heaven  and  earth  there  are  to 
be  added  the  good-will  of  the  Lord,  who  appeared  to  Moses  in  the 
thorn-bush  to  redeem  His  people  out  of  the  bondage  and  oppression 
of  Efr\^t  and  bring  it  into  the  land  of  Canaan,  the  land  flowing 
with  milk  and  honey  (Ex.  iii.  2  sqq.).      The  expression  "that 
dwells  in  the  bush"  is  to  be  explained  from  the  significance  of 
this  manifestation  of  God  as  shown  at  Ex.  iii.,  which  shadowed 
forth  a  permanent  relation  between  the  Lord  and  His  people.    The 
spiritual  blessing  of  the  covenant  grace  is  very  suitably  added  to 
the  blessings  of  nature ;   and  there  is  something  no  less  suitable 
in  the  way  in  which  the  construction  commencing  with  l^^l  is 
dropped,  so  that  an  anaholoutlion  ensues.      This  word  cannot  be 
taken  as  an  accusative  of  more  precise  definition,  as  Schultz  sup- 
poses ;  nor  is  10  to  be  supplied  before  it,  as  Knohel  suggests.    Gram 
matically  considered,  it  is  a  nominative  to  which  the  verb  r\m\in 
properly  belongs,  although,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  not  only  the  good- 
will,  but  the  natural  blessings,  of  the  Lord  were  also  to  come 


506  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

upon  the  head  of  Joseph.  Consequently  we  have  not  i^i^J  (masc), 
which  ji^*^  would  require,  but  the  lengthened  poetical  feminine  form 
nnsinn  (vid,  Uwald,  §  191,  c),  used  in  a  neuter  sense.  It,  i.e, 
everything  mentioned  before,  shall  come  upon  Joseph.  On  the 
expression,  "illustrious  among  his  brethren,"  see  at  Gen.  xlix.  26. 
In  the  strength  of  this  blessing,  the  tribe  of  Joseph  would  attain  to 
such  a  development  of  power,  that  it  would  be  able  to  tread  down 
all  nations. — Ver.  17.  "  The  first-horn  of  his  oXj  majesty  is  to  hirriy 
and  buffalo-horns  his  horns  :  with  them  he  thrusts  down  nations^  all  at 
once  the  ends  of  the  earth.  These  are  the  myriads  of  Ephraim,  and 
these  the  thousands  of  Manasseh"  The  "first-born  of  his  (Joseph's) 
oxen  "  (shor,  a  collective  noun,  as  in  chap.  xv.  19)  is  not  Joshua 
{Babb.,  Schultz)  ;  still  less  is  it  Joseph  (Bleek,  Diestel),  in  which 
case  the  pronoun  his  ox  would  be  quite  out  of  place  ;  nor  is  it  King 
Jeroboam  II.,  as  Graf  supposes.  It  is  rather  Ephraim,  whom  the 
patriarch  Jacob  raised  into  the  position  of  the  first-born  of  Joseph 
(Gen.  xlviii.  8  sqq.).  All  the  sons  of  Joseph  resembled  oxen,  but 
Ephraim  was  the  most  powerful  of  them  all.  He  was  endowed 
with  majesty ;  his  horns,  the  strong  weapon  of  oxen,  in  which  all 
their  strength  is  concentrated,  were  not  the  horns  of  common  oxen, 
but  horns  of  the  wild  buffalo  (reem,  Num.  xxiii.  22),  that  strong 
indomitable  beast  (cf.  Job  xxxix.  9  sqq. ;  Ps.  xxii.  22).  With  them 
he  would  thrust  down  nations,  the  ends  of  the  earth,  i.e,  the  most 
distant  nations  (yid.  Ps.  ii.  8,  vii.  9,  xxii.  28).  "  Together^^  Le.  all 
at  once,  belongs  rhythmically  to  "the  ends  of  the  earth."  Such  are 
the  myriads  of  Ephraim,  i,e,  in  such  might  will  the  myriads  of 
Ephraim  arise.  To  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  as  the  more  numerous, 
the  ten  thousands  are  assigned ;  to  the  tribe  of  Manasseh,  the 
thousands. 

Yers.  18  and  19.  Zebulun  and  Issachar. — "  Rejoice,  Zebulun, 
at  thy  going  out ;  and,  Issachar,  at  thy  tents.  Nations  will  they  invite 
to  the  mountain ;  there  offer  the  sacrifices  of  righteousness :  for  they 
suck  the  affluence  of  the  seas,  and  the  hidden  treasures  of  the  sand." 
The  tribes  of  the  last  two  sons  of  Leah  Moses  unites  together,  and, 
like  Jacob  in  Gen.  xlix.  13,  places  Zebulun  the  younger  first.  He 
first  of  all  confirms  the  blessing  which  Jacob  pronounced  through 
simply  interpreting  their  names  as  omina,  by  calling  upon  them  to 
rejoice  in  their  undertakings  abroad  and  at  home.  "  At  thy  tents" 
corresponds  to  "  at  thy  going  out"  (tents  being  used  poetically  for 
dwellings,  as  in  chap.  xvi.  7)  ;  like  "  sitting"  to  "  going  out  and 
coming  in"  in  2  Kings  xix.  27,  Isa.  xxxvii.  28,  Ps.  cxxxix.  2 ;  and 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  18,  19.  507 

describes  life  in  its  two  aspects  of  work  and  production,  rest  and 
recreation.  Although  "going  out"  (enterprise  and  labour)  is  attri- 
buted to  Zebulun,  and  "  remaining  in  tents"  (the  comfortable  en- 
joyment of  life)  to  Issachar,  in  accordance  with  the  delineation  of 
their  respective  characters  in  the  blessing  of  Jacob,  this  is  to  be 
attributed  to  the  poetical  parallelism  of  the  clauses,  and  the  whole 
is  to  be  understood  as  applying  to  both  in  the  sense  suggested  by 
Gi^af,  "Kejoice,  Zebulun  and  Issachar,  in  your  labour  and  your 
rest."  This  peculiarit}^,  which  is  founded  in  the  very  nature  of 
poetical  parallelism,  which  is  to  individualize  the  thought  by  dis- 
tributing it  into  parallel  members,  has  been  entirely  overlooked  by 
all  the  commentators  who  have  given  a  historical  interpretation  to 
each,  referring  the  "  going  out"  to  the  shipping  trade  and  commer- 
cial pursuits  of  the  Zebulunites,  and  the  expression  "  in  thy  tents  " 
either  to  the  spending  of  a  nomad  life  in  tents,  for  the  purpose  of 
performing  a  subordinate  part  in  connection  with  trade  (Schulfz), 
or  to  the  quiet  pursuits  of  agriculture  and  grazing  {Knohel).  They 
were  to  rejoice  in  their  undertakings  at  home  and  abroad ;  for  they 
w^ould  be  successful.  The  good  things  of  life  would  flow  to  them 
in  rich  abundance;  they  would  not  make  them  into  mammon,  how- 
ever, but  would  invite  nations  to  the  mountain,  and  there  offer 
sacrifices  of  righteousness.  "  The  peoples"  are  nations  generally, 
not  the  tribes  of  Israel,  still  less  the  members  of  their  own  tribes. 
By  the  "  mountain,^^  without  any  more  precise  definition,  we  are  not 
to  understand  Tabor  or  Carmel  any  more  than  the  mountain  land 
of  Canaan.  It  is  rather  "  the  mountain  of  the  Lord's  inheritance" 
(Ex.  XV.  17),  upon  which  the  Lord  was  about  to  plant  His  people, 
the  mountain  which  the  Lord  had  chosen  for  His  sanctuary,  and  in 
which  His  people  were  to  dwell  with  Him,  and  rejoice  in  sacrificial 
meals  of  fellowship  with  Him  (see  vol.  ii.  p.  55).  To  this  end 
the  Lord  had  sanctified  Moriah  through  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac  which 
He  required  of  Abraham,  though  it  had  not  been  revealed  to  Moses 
that  it  was  there  that  the  temple,  in  which  the  name  of  the  Lord 
in  Israel  would  dwell,  was  afterwards  to  be  built.  There  is  no  dis- 
tinct 'or  direct  allusion  to  Moriah  or  Zion,  as  the  temple-mountain, 
involved  in  the  words  of  Moses.  It  was  only  by  later  revelations 
and  appointments  on  the  part  of  God  that  this  was  to  be  made 
known.  The  words  simply  contain  the  Messianic  thought  that 
Zebulun  and  Issachar  would  offer  rich  praise-offerings  and  thank- 
offerings  to  the  Lord,  from  the  abundant  supply  of  earthly  good 
that  would  flow  to  them,  upon  the  mountain  which  He  would  make 


508  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

ready  as  the  seat  of  His  gracious  presence,  and  would  call,  i.e.  invite 
the  nations  to  the  sacrificial  meals  connected  with  them,  to  delight 
themselves  with  them  in  the  rich  gifts  of  the  Lord,  and  worship 
the  Lord  who  blessed  His  people  thus.  For  the  explanation  of  this 
thought,  see  Ps.  xxii.  28-3 L  Sacrifice  is  mentioned  here  as  an 
expression  of  divine  worship,  which  culminated  in  sacrifice;  and 
slain-ofPerings  are  mentioned,  not  burnt-offerings,  to  set  forth  the 
worship  of  God  under  the  aspect  of  blessedness  in  fellowship  with 
the  Lord.  "  Slain-offerings  of  righteousness"  are  not  merely  out- 
wardly legal  sacrifices,  in  conformity  with  the  ritual  of  the  law,  but 
such  as  were  offered  in  a  right  spirit,  which  was  well-pleasing  to  God 
(as  in  Ps.  iv.  6,  li.  21).  It  follows  as  a  matter  of  course,  therefore, 
that  by  the  abundance  of  th.e  seas  we  are  not  merely  to  under- 
stand the  profits  of  trade  upon  the  Mediterranean  Sea ;  and  that 
we  are  still  less  to  understand  by  the  hidden  treasures  of  the  sand 
"the  fish,  the  purple  snails,  and  sponges"  (Krtobel),  or  "  tunny-fish, 
purple  shells,  and  glass"  (Ps,  Jon,)  ;  but  that  the  words  receive  their 
best  exposition  from  Isa.  Ix.  5,  6,  16,  and  Ixvi.  11,  12,  i.e.  that  the 
thought  expressed  is,  that  the  riches  and  treasures  of  both  sea  and 
land  would  flow  to  the  tribes  of  Israel. 

Vers.  20  and  21.  Gad. — '^ Blessed  be  He  that  enlargeth  Gad:  like 
a  lioness  he  lieth  down^  and  teareth  the  arm,  yea,  the  crown  of  the  head. 
And  he  chose  his  first-fruit  territory,  for  thei^e  icas  the  leader  s  portion 
kept ;  and  he  came  to  the  heads  of  the  people,  he  executed  the  justice  of 
the  Lord,  and  his  rights  with  Israeli  Just  as  in  the  blessing  of  Noah 
(Gen.  ix.  26)  the  God  of  Shem  is  praised,  to  point  out  the  salvation 
appointed  by  God  for  Shem,  so  here  Moses  praises  the  Lord,  who 
enlarged  Gad,  i.e.  who  not  only  gave  him  a  broad  territory  in  the 
conquered  kingdom  of  Sihon,  but  furnished  generally  an  unlimited 
space  for  his  development  (vid.  Gen.  xxvi.  22),  so  that  he  might 
unfold  his  lion-like  nature  in  conflict  with  his  foes.  On  the  figure 
of  a  lioness,  see  Gen.  xlix.  9  ;  and  on  the  warlike  character  of  the 
Gadites,  the  remarks  on  the  blessing  of  Jacob  upon  Gad  (Gen. 
xlix.  19).  The  second  part  of  the  blessing  treats  of  the  inheritance 
which  Gad  obtained  from  Moses  at  his  own  request  beyond  Jordan. 
riK*!,  with  an  accusative  and  ^,  signifies  to  look  out  something  for 
oneself  (Gen.  xxii.  8 ;  1  Sam.  xvi.  17).  The  "  first-fruit"  refers 
here  to  the  first  portion  of  the  land  which  Israel  received  for  a  pos- 
session ;  this  is  evident  from  the  reason  assigned,  Hi^pn  DK^  ^3,  whilst 
the  statement  that  Gad  chose  the  hereditary  possession  is  in  har- 
mony with  Num.  xxxii.  2,  6,  25  sqq.,  where  the  children  of  Gad  are 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  20,  21.  509 

described  as  being  at  the  head  of  the  tribes,  who  came  before  Moses 
to  ask  for  the  conquered  land  as  their  possession.  The  meaning  of 
the  next  clause,  of  which  very  different  explanations  have  been 
given,  can  only  be,  that  Gad  chose  such  a  territory  for  its  inherit- 
ance as  became  a  leader  of  the  tribes,  pf^np^  he  who  determines, 
commands,  organizes ;  hence  both  a  commander  and  also  a  leader  in 
war.  It  is  in  the  latter  sense  that  it  occurs  both  here  and  in  Judg. 
V.  14.  Pi^riD  nppn^  the  field,  or  territory  of  the  leader,  may  either 
be  the  territory  appointed  or  assigned  by  the  lawgiver,  or  the  terri- 
tory falling  to  the  lot  of  the  leader.  According  to  the  former  view, 
Moses  would  be  the  mechokeh  But  the  thought,  that  Moses  ap- 
pointed or  assigned  him  his  inheritance,  could  be  no  reason  why 
Gad  should  choose  it  for  himself.  Consequently  PPn?p  nppn  can  only 
mean  the  possession  which  the  mechokek  chose  for  himself,  as  befit- 
ting him,  or  specially  adapted  for  him.  Consequently  the  mechokek 
was  not  Moses,  but  the  tribe  of  Gad,  which  was  so  called  because 
it  unfolded  such  activity  and  bravery  at  the  head  of  the  tribes  in 
connection  with  the  conquest  of  the  land,  that  it  could  be  regarded 
as  their  leader.  This  peculiar  prominence  on  the  part  of  the  Gadites 
may  be  inferred  from  the  fact,  that  they  distinguished  themselves 
above  the  Reubenites  in  the  fortification  of  the  conquered  land 
(Num.  xxxii.  34  sqq.).  riSD?  ^^^"^  ^^9?  ^^  c3over,  hide,  preserve,  is  a 
predicate,  and  construed  as  a  noun,  "  a  thing  preserved." — On  the 
other  hand,  the  opinion  has  been  very  widely  spread,  from  the  time 
of  Onkelos  down  to  Baumgarten  and  Ewald,  that  this  hemistich  refers 
to  Moses  :  "  there  is  the  portion  of  the  lawgiver  hidden,"  or  "  the 
field  of  the  hidden  leader,"  and  that  it  contains  an  allusion  to  the 
fact  that  the  grave  of  Moses  was  hidden  in  the  inheritance  of  Gad. 
But  this  is  not  only  at  variance  with  the  circumstance,  that  a  pro- 
phetic allusion  to  the  grave  of  Moses  such  as  Baumgarten  assumes 
is  apparently  inconceivable,  from  the  simple  fact  that  we  cannot 
imagine  the  Gadites  to  have  foreseen  the  situation  of  Moses'  grave 
at  the  time  when  they  selected  their  territory,  but  also  with  the  fact 
that,  according  to  Josh.  xiii.  20,  the  spot  where  this  grave  was  situ- 
ated (chap,  xxxiv.  5)  was  not  allotted  to  the  tribe  of  Gad,  but  to 
that  of  Eeuben ;  and  lastly,  with  the  use  of  the  word  chelkah,  which 
does  not  signify  a  burial-ground  or  grave. — But  although  Gad  chose 
out  an  inheritance  for  himself,  he  still  went  before  his  brethren,  i.e. 
along  with  the  rest  of  the  tribes,  into  Canaan,  to  perform,  in  con- 
nection with  them,  what  the  Lord  demanded  of  His  people  as  a  right. 
This  is  the  meaning  of  the  second  half  of  the  verse.     The  clause. 


510  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

"  he  came  to  the  heads  of  the  people,"  does  not  refer  to  the  fact 
tliat  the  Gadites  came  to  Moses  and  the  heads  of  the  congregation, 
to  ask  for  the  conquered  land  as  a  possession  (Num.  xxxii.  2),  but 
expresses  the  thought  that  Gad  joined  the  heads  of  the  people  to 
go  at  the  head  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  (comp.  Josh.  i.  14,  iv.  12, 
with  Num.  xxxii.  17,  21,  32),  to  conquer  Canaan  with  the  whole 
nation,  and  root  out  the  Canaanites.  The  Gadites  had  promised 
this  to  Moses  and  the  heads  of  the  people  ;  and  this  promise  Moses 
regarded  as  an  accomplished  act,  and  praised  in  these  words  with 
prophetic  foresight  as  having  been  already  performed,  and  that  not 
merely  as  one  single  manifestation  of  their  obedience  towards  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  but  rather  as  a  pledge  that  Gad  would  always 
manifest  the  same  disposition.  "  To  do  the  righteousness  of  Je- 
hovah," i.e,  to  do  what  Jehovah  requires  of  His  people  as  righteous- 
ness,— namely,  to  fulfil  the  commandments  of  God,  in  which  the 
righteousness  of  Israel  was  to  consist  (chap.  vi.  25).  ^5^1,  imperfect 
Kal  for  nnx;;  or  nnx^ ;  see  Ges.  §  76, 2,  c,  and  Ewald,  §  142,  c.  "  With 
Israel :"  in  fellowship  with  (the  rest  of)  Israel. 

Ver.  22.  Dan  is  "  a  young  lion  which  springs  out  of  BashanP 
Whilst  Jacob  compared  him  to  a  serpent  by  the  way,  which  sud- 
denly bites  a  horse's  feet,  so  that  its  rider  falls  backward,  Moses 
gives  greater  prominence  to  the  strength  which  Dan  would  display 
in  conflict  with  foes,  by  calling  him  a  young  lion  which  suddenly 
springs  out  of  its  ambush.  The  reference  to  Bashan  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  expedition  of  the  Danites  against  Laish,  in  the  valley 
of  Rehoboth  (Judg.  xviii.  28),  as  this  valley  did  not  belong  to 
Bashan.  It  is  to  be  explained  from  the  simple  fact,  that  in  the 
regions  of  eastern  Bashan,  which  abound  with  caves,  and  more 
especially  in  the  woody  western  slopes  of  Jebel  Hauran,  many  lions 
harboured,  which  rushed  forth  from  the  thicket,  and  were  very 
dangerous  enemies  to  the  herds  of  Bashan.  Even  if  no  other  express 
testimonies  to  this  fact  are  to  be  found,  it  may  be  inferred  from  the 
description  given  of  the  eastern  spurs  of  Antilibanus  in  the  Song  of 
Sol.  (iv.  8),  as  the  abodes  of  lions  and  leopards.  The  meaning  leap 
forth,  spring  out,  is  confirmed  by  both  the  context  and  dialects, 
though  the  word  only  occurs  here. 

Yer.  23.  Naphtalt. — "  0  Naphtali,  satisfied  loith  favour,  and 
full  of  the  blessing  of  Jehovah  ;  of  sea  and  south  shall  he  take  pos- 
sessionr  If  the  gracefulness  of  Naphtali  is  set  forth  in  the  blessing 
of  Jacob,  by  comparing  it  to  a  gazelle,  here  Moses  assures  the  same 
tribe  of  satisfaction  with  the  favour  and  blessing  of  God,  and  pro- 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  24,  25.  511 

mises  it  the  possession  of  the  sea  and  of  the  south,  i.e.  an  inherit- 
ance which  should  combine  the  advantages  of  the  sea — a  healthy 
sea-breeze — with  the  grateful  warmth  of  the  south.  This  blessing 
is  expressed  in  far  too  general  terms  for  it  to  be  possible  to  interpret 
it  historically,  as  relating  to  the  natural  characteristics  of  the  in- 
heritance of  the  Naphtalites  in  Canaan,  or  to  regard  it  as  based 
upon  them,  apart  altogether  from  the  fact,  that  the  territory  of 
Naphtali  was  situated  in  the  north-east  of  Canaan,  and  reached  as 
far  as  the  sea  of  Galilee,  and  that  it  was  for  the  most  part  moun- 
tainous, though  it  was  a  very  fertile  hill-country  (Josh,  xviii.  32-39), 
n^l  is  a  very  unique  form  of  the  imperative,  though  this  does  not 
warrant  an  alteration  of  the  text. 

Vers.  24  and  25.  Asher. — "  Blessed  before  the  sons  he  Asher  ; 
let  him  he  the  favoured  among  his  brethren,  and  dipping  his  foot  in  oil. 
Iron  and  brass  be  thy  castle ;  and  as  the  days  of  thy  life  let  thy  rest 
continue."  Asher,  the  prosperous  (see  at  Gen.  xxx.  15),  was  justly 
to  bear  the  name.  He  was  to  be  a  child  of  prosperity ;  blessed  with 
earthly  good,  he  was  to  enjoy  rest  all  his  life  long  in  strong  for- 
tresses. It  is  evident  enough  that  this  blessing  is  simply  an  expo- 
sition of  the  name  Asher,  and  that  Moses  here  promises  the  tribe  a 
verification  of  the  omen  contained  in  its  name.  C3''i3»  r\r\3,  does  not 
mean  "  blessed  with  children,"  or  "  praised  because  of  his  children," 
in  which  case  we  should  have  VJZi ;  but  "  blessed  before  the  sons" 
(cf.  Judg.  v.  24),  i.e.  blessed  before  the  sons  of  Jacob,  who  were 
peculiarly  blessed,  equivalent  to  the  most  blessed  of  all  the  sons  of 
Israel.  VHK  "'^Vi  does  not  mean  the  beloved  among  his  brethren, 
acceptable  to  his  brethren,  but  the  one  who  enjoyed  the  favour  of 
the  Lord,  i,e.  the  one  peculiarly  favoured  by  the  Lord.  Dipping 
the  foot  in  oil  points  to' a  land  flowing  with  oil  (Job  xxix.  6),  i.e.  fat 
or  fertile  throughout,  which  Jacob  had  already  promised  to  Asher 
(see  Gen.  xlix.  20).  To  complete  the  prosperity,  however,  security 
and  rest  were  required  for  the  enjoyment  of  the  blessings  bestowed 
by  God ;  and  these  are  promised  in  ver.  25.  ^V^^  (utt.  \ey.)  does 
not  mean  a  shoe,  but  is  derived  from  ^V^^,  to  bolt  ( Judg.  iii.  23),  and 
signifies  either  a  bolt,  or  that  which  is  shut  fast ;  a  poetical  expres- 
sion for  a  castle  or  fortress.  Asher's  dwellings  were  to  be  castles, 
fortresses  of  iron  and  brass ;  i.e.  as  strong  and  impregnable  as  if 
they  were  built  of  iron  and  brass.  The  pursuit  of  mining  is  not 
to  be  thought  of  as  referred  to  here,  even  though  the  territory  of 
Asher,  which  reached  to  Lebanon,  may  have  contained  brass  and 
iron  (see  at  chap.  viii.  9).    Luther  follows  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate, 


y 


512  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

and  renders  this  clause,  "  iron  and  brass  be  upon  his  shoes  ;"  but 
this  is  undoubtedly  wrong,  as  the  custom  of  fastening  the  shoes  or 
sandals  with  brass  or  iron  was  quite  unknown  to  the  Israelites;  and 
even  Goliath,  who  was  clothed  in  brass  from  head  to  foot,  and  wore 
iron  greaves,  had  no  iron  sandals,  though  the  military  shoes  of  the 
ancient  Romans  had  nails  in  the  soles.  Moreover,  the  context  con- 
tains no  reference  to  war,  so  as  to  suggest  the  idea  that  the  treading 
down  and  crushing  of  the  foe  are  intended.  "As  thy  days,"  i.e.  as 
long  as  the  days  of  thy  life  last,  let  thy  rest  be  (continue).  Luther  s 
rendering,  "  let  thine  old  age  be  as  thy  youth,"  which  follows  the 
Vulgate,  cannot  be  sustained ;  for  although  i^^"^,  derived  from  nfc^'i, 
to  vanish  away,  certainly  might  signify  old  age,  the  expression 
"  thy  days"  cannot  possibly  be  understood  as  signifying  youth. 

Vers.  26-29.  The  conclusion  of  the  blessing  corresponds  to  the 
introduction.  As  Moses  commenced  with  the  glorious  fact  of  the 
founding  of  the  kingdom  of  Jehovah  in  Israel,  as  the  firm  founda- 
tion of  the  salvation  of  His  people,  so  he  also  concludes  with  a 
reference  to  the  Lord  their  eternal  refuge,  and  with  a  congratulation 
of  Israel  which  could  find  refuge  in  such  a  God. — Vers.  26,  27. 
"  Who  is  as  God,  a  righteous  nation,  who  rides  in  heaven  to  thy 
help,  and  in  His  exaltation  upon  the  clouds.  Abiding  is  the  God  of 
olden  time,  and  beneath  are  everlasting  arms  :  and  He  drives  the 
enemy  before  thee,  and  says.  Destroy. ^^  The  meaning  is  :  No  other 
nation  has  a  God  who  rules  in  heaven  with  almighty  power,  and 
is  a  refuge  and  help  to  his  people  against  every  foe.  Jeshm^n 
is  a  vocative,  and  the  alteration  of  p^^  into  p^^,  "  as  the  God  of 
Jeshurun,"  according  to  the  ancient  versions,  is  to  be  rejected  on 
the  simple  ground  that  the  expression  "  in  thy  help,"  which  follows 
immediately  afterwards,  is  an  address  t®  Israel.  Riding  upon  the 
heaven  and  the  clouds  is  a  figure  used  to  denote  the  unlimited 
omnipotence  with  which  God  rules  the  world  out  of  heaven,  and  is 
the  helper  of  His  people.  "  In  thy  help,"  i.e.  as  thy  helper.  This 
God  is  a  dwelling  to  His  people,  njjjp,  like  the  masculine  jiJ^  ^^ 
Ps.  xc.  1,  and  xci.  9,  signifies  "  dwelling," — a  genuine  Mosaic 
figure,  to  which,  in  all  probability,  the  houseless  wandering  of  the 
people  in  the  desert,  which  made  them  feel  the  full  worth  of  a 
dwelling,  first  gave  rise.  The  figure  not  only  implies  that  God 
grants  protection  and  a  refuge  to  His  people  in  the  storms  of  life 
(Ps.  xci.  1,  2,  cf.  Isa.  iv.  6),  but  also  that  He  supplies  His  people 
with  everything  that* can  afford  a  safe  abode.  "  The  God  of  old," 
i.e.  who  has  proved  Himself  to  be  God  from  the  very  beginning  of 


I 


I 


CHAP.  XXXIII.  26-29.  513 

the  world  {vid,  Ps.  xc.  1 ;  Hab.  i.  12).  The  expression  "  under- 
2ieath"  is  to  be  explained  from  the  antithesis  to  the  heaven  where 
God  is  enthroned  above  mankind.  He  who  is  enthroned  in  heaven 
above  is  also  the  God  who  is  with  His  people  upon  the  earth  below, 
and  holds  and  boars  them  in  His  arms.  "  Everlasting  arms"  are 
arms  whose  strength  is  never  exhausted.  There  is  no  need  to 
supply  "  thee"  after  "  underneath ;"  the  expression  should  rather  be 
left  in  its  general  form,  '^  upon  the  earth  beneath."  The  reference 
to  Israel  is  obvious  from  the  context.  The  driving  of  the  enemy 
before  Israel  is  not  to  be  restricted  to  the  rooting  out  of  the 
Canaanites,  but  applies  to  every  enemy  of  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord. — Ver.  28.  "  And  Israel  dwells  safely,  alone  the  fountain  of 
Jacoh^  in  a  land  full  of  corn  and  wine ;  his  heavens  also  drop  down 
dew  J'  Because  the  God  of  old  was  the  dwelling  and  help  of 
Israel,  it  dwelt  safely  and  separate  from  the  other  nations,  in  a 
land  abounding  with  corn  and  wine.  "  The  fountain  of  Jacob"  is 
parallel  to  "  Israel;"  "  alone  (separate)  dwells  the  fountain  of  Jacob.'' 
This  title  is  given  to  Israel  as  having  sprung  from  the  patriarch 
Jacob,  in  whom  it  had  its  source.  A  similar  expression  occurs  in 
Ps.  Ixviii.  27.  It  completely  destroys  the  symmetry  of  the  clauses 
of  the  verse  to  connect  the  words,  as  Luther  does,  with  what  follows, 
in  the  sense  of  "  the  eye  of  Jacob  is  directed  upon  a  land."  The 
construction  of  |3'f  with  ?^,  to  dwell  into  a  land,  may  be  explained 
on  the  ground  that  the  dwelling  involves  the  idea  of  spreading  out 
over  the  land.  On  the  "  land  of  corn,"  etc.,  see  chap.  viii.  7  and  8. 
fjX  is  emphatic  :  yea  his  heaven,  i.e.  the  heaven  of  this  land  drops 
down  dew  (vld.  Gen.  xxvii.  28).  Israel  was  to  be  congratulated 
upon  this. — Ver.  29.  "  Hail  to  thee,  0  Israel!  who  is  like  thee,  a 
people  saved  in  the  Lord,  the  shield  of  thy  help,  and  who  (is)  the 
sword  of  thine  eminence.  Thine  enemies  will  deny  themselves  to  thee, 
and  thou  ridest  upon  their  heights."  "  Saved ;"  not  merely  delivered 
from  danger  and  distress,  but  in  general  endowed  with  salvation 
(like  Zech.  ix.  9 ;  see  also  Isa.  xlv.  17).  The  salvation  of  Israel 
rested  in  the  Lord,  as  the  ground  out  of  which  it  grew,  from  which 
it  descended,  because  the  Lord  was  its  help  and  shield,  as  He  had 
already  promised  Abraham  (Gen.  xv.  1),  and  "  the  sword  of  his 
eminence,"  Le.  the  sword  which  had  fought  for  the  eminence  of 
Israel.  But  because  the  Lord  was  Israel's  shield  and  sword,  or,  so 
to  speak,  both  an  offensive  and  defensive  weapon,  his  enemies  denied 
themselves  to  him,  i.e.  feigned  friendship,  did  not  venture  to  appear 
openly  as  enemies  (for  the  meaning  "  feign,"  act  the  hypocrite,  see 

TENT. — VOL.  III.  2  K 


514  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

Ps.  xviii.  45,  Ixxxi.  16).  But  Israel  would  ride  upon  their  heights, 
the  high  places  of  their  land,  i,e,  would  triumph  over  all  its  foes 
(see  at  chap,  xxxii.  13). 


I 


DEATH  AND  BURIAL  OF  MOSES. — CHAP.  XXXIV. 


A 


Vers.  1-8.  After  blessing  the  people,  Moses  ascended  Mount 
Nebo,  according  to  the  command  of  God  (chap,  xxxii.  48-51),  and 
there  the  Lord  showed  him,  in  all  its  length  and  breadth,  that  pro- 
mised land  into  which  he  was  not  to  enter.  From  Nebo,  a  peak  of 
Pisgah,  which  affords  a  very  extensive  prospect  on  all  sides  (see  p*^| 
214),  he  saw  the  land  of  Gilead,  the  land  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan  " 
as  far  as  Dan,  Le.  not  Laish-Dan  near  the  central  source  of  the 
Jordan  (Judg.  xviii.  27),  which  did  not  belong  to  Gilead,  but  a 
Dan  in  northern  Peraea,  which  has  not  yet  been  discovered  (see  at 
Gen.  xiv.  14) ;  and  the  whole  of  the  land  on  the  west  of  the  Jordan, 
Canaan  proper,  in  all  its  different  districts,  namely,  "  the  whole  of 
Naphtalij^^  i.e.  the  later  Galilee  on  the  north,  "  the  land  of  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh^^  in  the  centre,  and  ^Uhe  whole  of  the  land  of  Judah,'^ 
the  southern  portion  of  Canaan,  in  all  its  breadth,  "  to  the  hinder 
(Mediterranean)  sea^^  (see  chap.  xi.  24)  ;  also  "  the  south  land"*^ 
{Negeh :  see  at  Num.  xiii.  17),  the  southern  land  of  steppe  towards 
the  Arabian  desert,  and  "  the  valley  of  the  Jordan'^  (see  Gen.  xiii. 
10),  i.e.  the  deep  valley  from  Jericho  the  palm-city  (so  called  from 
the  palms  which  grew  there,  in  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  :  Judg.  i. 
16,  iii.  43 ;  2  Chron.  xxviii.  15)  "  to  Zoar"  at  the  southern  ex- 
tremity of  the  Dead  Sea  (see  at  Gen.  xix.  22).  This  sight  of  every 
part  of  the  land  on  the  east  and  west  was  not  an  ecstatic  vision,  but 
a  sight  with  the  bodily  eyes,  whose  natural  power  of  vision  was 
miraculously  increased  by  God,  to  give  Moses  a  glimpse  at  least  of 
the  glorious  land  which  he  was  not  to  tread,  and  delight  his  eye 
with  a  view  of  the  inheritance  intended  for  his  people. — Vers.  5,  6. 
After  this  favour  had  been  granted  him,  the  aged  servant  of  the 
Lord  was  to  taste  death  as  the  wages  of  sin.  There,  i.e.  upon 
Mount  Nebo,  he  died,  "  at  the  mouthy^  i.e.  according  to  the  com- 
mandment, "  of  the  Lord^*  (not  "  by  a  kiss  of  the  Lord,"  as  the 
Rabbins  interpret  it),  in  the  land  of  Moab,  not  in  Canaan  (see  at 
Num.  xxvii.  12-14).  "  And  He  buried  him  in  the  land  of  Moab, 
over  against  Beth  PeorP  The  subject  in  this  sentence  is  Jehovah. 
Though  the  third  person  singular  would  allow  of  the  verb  being 
taken  as  impersonal   (eOayfrav  avroVj   LXX. :    they  buried  him), 


CHAP.  XXXIV.  1-8.  515 

such  a  rendering  is  precluded  by  the  statement  which  follows,  "  no 
man  knoweth  of  his  sepulchre  unto  this  dayT  "  The  valley"  where 
the  Lord  buried  Moses  was  certainly  not  the  Jordan  valley,  as  in 
chap.  iii.  29,  but  most  probably  "  the  valley  in  the  field  of  Moab, 
upon  the  top  of  Pisgah,"  mentioned  in  Num'.  xxi.  20,  near  to  Nebo 
(see  p.  148)  ;  in  any  case,  a  valley  on  the  mountain,  not  far  from 
the  top  of  Nebo. — The  Israelites  inferred  what  is  related  in  vers. 
1-6  respecting  the  end  of  Moses'  life,  from  the  promise  of  God  in 
chap,  xxxii.  49,  and  Num.  xxvii.  12,  13,  which  was  communicated 
to.  them  by  Moses  himself  (chap.  iii.  27),  and  from  the  fact  that 
Moses  went  up  Mount  Nebo,  from  which  he  never  returned.  On 
his  ascending  the  mountain,  the  eyes  of  the  people  would  certainly 
follow  him  as  far  as  they  possibly  could.  It  is  also  very  possible 
that  there  were  many  parts  of  the  Israelitish  camp  from  which  the 
top  of  Nebo  was  visible,  so  that  the  eyes  of  his  people  could  not 
only  accompany  him  thither,  but  could  also  see  that  when  the  Lord 
had  shown  him  the  promised  land.  He  went  down  with  him  into 
the  neighbouring  valley,  where  Moses  was  taken  for  ever  out  of 
their  sight.  There  is  not  a  word  in  the  text  about  God  having 
brought  the  body  of  Moses  down  from  the  mountain  and  buried  it 
in  the  valley.  This  "romantic  idea"  is  invented  by  Knobel,  ior 
the  purpose  of  throwing  suspicion  upon  the  historical  truth  of  a  fact 
which  is  offensive  to  him.  The  fact  itself  that  the  Lord  buried  His 
servant  Moses,  iind  no  man  knows  of  his  sepulchre,  is  in  perfect 
keeping  with  the  relation  in  which  Moses  stood  to  the  Lord  while 
he  was  alive.  Even  if  his  sin  at  the  water  of  strife  rendered  it 
necessary  that  he  should  suffer  the  punishment  of  death,  as  a 
memorable  example  of  the  terrible  severity  of  the  holy  God  against 
sin,  even  in  the  case  of  His  faithful  servant ;  yet  after  tlie  justice 
of  God  had  been  satisfied  by  this  punishment,  he  was  to  be  distin- 
guished in  death  before  all  the  people,  and  glorified  as  the  servant 
who  had  been  found  faithful  in  all  the  house  of  God,  whom  the 
Lord  had  known  face  to  face  (ver.  10),  and  to  whom  He  had  spoken 
mouth  to  mouth  (Num.  xii.  7,  8).  The  burial  of  Moses  by  the 
hand  of  Jehovah  was  not  intended  to  conceal  his  grave,  for  the 
purpose  of  guarding  against  a  superstitious  and  idolatrous  reverence 
for  his  grave;  for  with  the  opinion  held  by  the  Israelites,  that 
corpses  and  graves  defiled,  there  was  but  little  fear  of  this ;  but,  as 
we  may  infer  from  the  account  of  the  transfiguration  of  Jesus,  the 
intention  was  to  place  him  in  the  same  category  with  Enoch  and 
Elijah.     As  Kurtz  observes,  "  The  purpose  of  God  was  to  prepare 


516  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MOSES. 

'  for  Lim  a  condition,  both  of  body  and  soul,  resembling  that  of  these 
two  men  of  God.     Men  bury  a  corpse  that  it  may  pass  into  corrup-  Jl 
^tion.     If  Jehovah,  therefore,  would  not  suffer  the  body  of  Moses  to  "" 
/be  buried  by  men,  it  is  but  natural  to  seek  for  the  reason  in  the  fact 
'^that  He  did  not  intend  to  leave  him  to  corruption,  but,  when  burying  11 
fit  with  His  own  hand,  imparted  a  power  to  it  which  preserved  it 
from  corruption,  and  prepared  the  way  for  it  to  pass  into  the  same 
form  of  existence  to  which  Enoch  and  Elijah  were  taken,  without  al 
cither  death  or  burial." — There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  truth  lies 
at  the  foundation  of  the  Jewish  theologoumenon  mentioned  in  the 
Epistle  of  Jude,  concerning  the  contest  between  Michael  the  arch-  -fll 
angel  and  the  devil  for  the  body  of  Moses. — Vers.  7,  8.  Though  he 
died  at  the  age  of  one  hundred  and  twenty  (see  at  chap.  xxxi.  2), 
Moses'  eyes  had  not  become  dim,  and  his  freshness  had  not  abated 
(Df?  air  Xey.,  connected  with  np  in  Gen.  xxx.  37,  signifies  freshness). 
Thus  had  the  Lord  preserved  the  full  vital  energy  of  His  servant, 
even  till  the  time  of  his  death.     The  mourning  of  the  people  lasted 
thirty  days,  as  in  the  case  of  Aaron  (Num.  xx.  29).  M\ 

Vers.  9-12.  Joshua  now  took  Moses*  place  as  the  leader  of  the  ™' 
people,  filled  with  the  spirit  of  wisdom  (practical  wisdom,  mani- 
festing itself  in  action),  because  Moses  had  ordained  him  to  his 
j  office  by  the  laying  on  of  hands  (Num.  xxvii.  18).  And  the  people 
<  obeyed  him ;  but  he  was  not  like  Moses.  "  There  arose  no  more  a 
I  prophet  in  Israel  like  unto  Moses,  whom  the  Lord  knew  face  to  face,'' 
i.e.  so  far  as  the  miracles  and  signs  were  concerned  which  Moses 
did,  by  virtue  of  his  divine  mission,  upon  Pharaoh,  his  servants,  and 
his  land,  and  the  terrible  acts  which  he  performed  before  the  eyes 
of  Israel  (vers.  11  and  12  ;  vid.  chap.  xxvi.  8,  and  iv.  34).  "  Whom 
Jehovah  knew  :^^  not  who  knew  Him,  the  Lord.  "To  know,"  like 
jiv(o<7Keiv  in  1  Cor.  viii.  3,  relates  to  the  divine  knowledge,  which 
not  only  involves  a  careful  observance  (chap.  ii.  7),  but  is  also  a 
manifestation  of  Himself  to  man,  a  penetration  of  man  with  the 
spiritual  power  of  God.  Because  he  was  thus  known  by  the  Lord, 
Aloses  was  able  to  perform  signs  and  wonders,  and  mighty,  terrible 
acts,  such  as  no  other  performed  either  before  or  after  him.  In 
this  respect  Joshua  stood  far  below  Moses,  and  no  prophet  arose  in 
Israel  like  unto  Moses. — This  remark  concerning  Moses  does  not 
presuppose  that  a  long  series  of  prophets  had  already  risen  up  since 
the  time  of  Moses.  When  Joshua  had  defeated  the  Canaanites, 
and  conquered  their  land  with  the  powerful  help  of  the  Lord, 
which  was  still  manifested  in  signs  and  wonders,  and  had  divided 


CONCLUDING  REMARKS.  51 7 

it  among  the  children  of  Israel ,  and  when  the  tribes  had  settled 
down  in  their  inheritance,  so  that  the  different  portions  of  the  land 
began  to  be  called  by  the  names  of  Naphtali,  Ephraim,  Manasseh, 
and  Judah,  as  is  the  case  in  ver.  2 ;  the  conviction  might  already 
have  become  established  in  Israel,  that  no  other  prophet  would  arise 
like  Moses,  to  whom  the  Lord  had  manifested  Himself  with  such 
signs  and  wonders  before  the  Egyptians  and  the  eyes  of  Israel. 
The  position  occupied  by  Joshua  in  relation  to  this  his  predecessor, 
as  the  continuer  of  his  work,  would  necessarily  awaken  and  confirm 
this  conviction,  in  connection  with  what  the  Lord  had  said  as  to 
the  superiority  of  Moses  to  all  the  prophets  (Num.  xii.  6  sqq.). 
Moses  was  the  founder  and  mediator  of  the  old  covenant.  As  lontr 
as  this  covenant  was  to  last,  no  prophet  could  arise  in  Israel  like 
unto  Moses.  There  is  but  One  who  is  worthy  of  greater  honour 
than  Moses,  namely,  the  Apostle  and  High  Priest  of  our  profession, 
who  is  placed  as  the  Son  over  all  the  house  of  God,  in  which  Moses 
was  found  faithful  as  a  servant  (compare  Heb.  iii.  2-6  with  Num. 
xu.  7),  Jesus  Christ,  the  founder  and  mediator  of  the  new  and  ever- 
lasting covenant. 


CONCLUDING  REMARKS  ON  THE  COMPOSITION  OF  THE 
PENTATEUCH. 

If  w^e  close  our  commentary  with  another  survey  of  tne  entire 
work,  viz.  the  five  books  of  Moses,  we  may  sum  up  the  result  of  our 
detailed  exposition,  so  far  as  critical  opinions  respecting  its  origin 
are  concerned,  in  these  words  :  We  have  found  the  decision  which 
we  pronounced  in  our  General  Introduction,  as  to  the  internal 
unity  and  system  of  the  whole  Thorah,  as  well  as  its  Mosaic  origin, 
thoroughly  confirmed.  With  the  exception  of  the  last  chapters  of 
the  fifth  book,  which  are  distinctly  shown  to  be  an  appendix  to  the 
Mosaic  Thorahy  added  by  a  different  hand,  by  the  statement  in  Deut. 
xxxi.  24  sqq.,  that  when  the  book  of  the  law  was  finished  Moses 
handed  it  over  to  the  Levites  to  keep,  there  is  nothing  in  the  whole 
of  the  five  books  which  Moses  might  not  have  written.  There  are 
no  historical  circumstances  or  events  either  mentioned  or  assumed, 
which  occurred  for  the  first  time  after  Moses  was  dead.  Neither 
the  allusion  to  the  place  called  Dan  in  Gen.  xiv.  14  (cf.  Deut. 
xxxiv.  1)  ;  nor  the  remark  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  1,  that  there  were  kings 


518  CONCLUDING  REMARKS  ON  THE 


in  the  land  of  Edom  before  the  children  of  Israel  had  a  king  over 
them ;  nor  the  statement  that  the  monument  which  Jacob  erected 
over  Eachel's  grave  remained  "to  this  day"  (Gen.  xxxv.  20); 
nor  even  the  assertion  in  Deut.  iii.  14,  that  Jair  called  Bashan 
"  Chawoth  Jair"  after  his  own  name,  furnishes  any  definite  and 
unmistakeable  indication  of  a  post-Mosaic  time.-^  And  the  account 
in  Ex.  xvi.  35,  that  the  Israelites  ate  the  manna  forty  years,  till 
they  came  to  an  inhabited  land,  "to  the  end,"  i.e.  the  extreme 
boundary,  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  could  only  be  adduced  by  Bleek 
{Einl.  p.  204)  as  an  evident  proof  that  "  this  could  not  have  been 
written  before  the  arrival  of  the  Israelites  in  the  land  of  Canaan," 
tlirough  a  Trapepfirjveui,  or  misinterpretation  of  the  words,  "  into  the 
land  of  their  dwelling."  For  were  not  the  Israelites  on  the  border 
of  the  land  when  they  were  encamped  in  the  steppes  of  Moab  by 
the  Jordan  opposite  to  Jericho  ?  Or  are  we  to  suppose  that  the 
kingdoms  of  Sihon  and  Og  with  then:  cities,  which  the  Israelites 
had  already  conquered  under  Moses,  were  an  uninhabited  land  I 
The  passage  mentioned  last  simply  proves,  that  in  the  middle  books 
of  the  Pentateuch  we  have  not  simple  diaries  before  us  containing 
the  historical  occurrences  of  the  Mosaic  times,  but  a  w^ork  drawn 
up  according  to  a  definite  plan,  and  written  in  the  last  year  of 
Moses'  life.  This  is  apparent  from  the  remarks  about  the  shining 
face  of  Moses  (Ex.  xxxiv.  33—35),  and  the  guidance  of  Israel  in  aU 
its  journeys  by  the  pillar  of  cloud  (Ex.  xl.  38,  cf.  Num.  x.  34),  as 
well  as  from  the  systematic  arrangement  and  distribution  of  the 
materials  according  to  certain  well-defined  and  obvious  points  of 
view,  as  we  have  already  endeavoured  to  show  in  the  introductions 
to  the  different  books,  and  in  the  exposition  itself. 

If,  however,  the  composition  of  the  whole  Thorah  by  Moses  is 
thus  firmly  established,  in  accordance  with  the  statements  in  Deut. 
xxxi.  9  and  24,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  Moses  wrote  the  whole 

^  But  even  if  the  remarks  in  Gen.  xxxv.  20  and  Deut.  iii.  14  concerning  the 
preservation  of  the  monument  over  Rachel's  grave,  and  the  retention  of  the 
names  which  Jair  gave  to  the  towns  of  Bashan,  should  reaUy  point  to  a  post- 
Mosaic  time,  no  modest  critic  would  ever  think  of  adducing  two  such  gloss-like 
notices  as  a  proof  of  the  later  origin  of  the  whole  Pentateuch,  but  would  regard 
these  notices  as  nothing  more  than  a  gloss  interpolated  by  a  later  hand.  In 
the  case,  of  the  monument  upon  Rachel's  grave,  however,  if  it  continued  in 
existence  for  centuries,  it  is  not  only  conceivable,  but  by  no  means  improbable, 
that  the  spies  sent  into  Canaan  from  Kadesh,  who  passed  through  the  land 
from  Hebron  to  Hamath,  saw  it  by  the  high  road  where  the  grave  was  situated, 
and  brought  the  intelligence  of  its  preservation  to  Moses  and  the  people. 


^1 


COMPOSITION  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH,  519 

work  from  Gen.  i.  to  Deut.  xxxi.  uno  tenore,  and  in  tlie  closiniz; 
days  of  his  life.  Even  in  this  case  it  may  have  been  written  step 
by  step ;  and  not  only  Genesis,  but  the  three  middle  books,  may 
have  been  composed  before  the  discourses  in  the  fifth  book,  so  that 
the  whole  work  was  simply  finished  and  closed  after  the  renewal  of 
the  covenant  recorded  in  Deut.  xxix.  and  xxx.  Again,  such  state- 
ments as  that  Moses  wrote  this  law,  and  made  an  end  of  writinx^ 
the  words  of  this  law  in  a  book  till  they  were  finished  (Deut.  xxxi. 
9  and  24),  by  no  means  require  us  to  assume  that  Moses  wrote  it 
all  with  his  own  hand.  The  epistles  which  the  Apostle  Paul  sent 
to  the  different  churches  were  rarely  written  with  his  own  hand, 
but  were  dictated  to  one  of  his  assistants  ;  yet  their  Pauline  origin 
is  not  called  in  question  in  consequence.  And  so  Moses  may  have 
employed  some  assistant,  either  a  priest  or  scribe  (shoter),  in  the 
composition  of  the  book  of  the  law,  without  its  therefore  failing  to 
be  his  own  work.  Still  less  is  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Penta- 
teuch rendered  doubtful  by  the  fact  that  he  availed  himself  of 
written  documents  from  earlier  times  in  writing  the  primeval  his- 
tory, and  incorporated  them  to  some  extent  in  the  book  of  Genesis 
without  alteration ;  and  that  in  the  history  of  his  own  time,  and 
when  introducing  the  laws  into  his  work,  he  inserted  documents  in 
the  middle  books  which  had  been  prepared  by  the  priests  and  sko- 
terim  at  his  own  command, — such,  for  example,  as  the  lists  of  the 
numbering  of  the  people  (Num.  i.-iii.  and  xxvi.),  the  account  of 
the  dedicatory  offerings  of  the  tribe-princes  (Num.  vii.),  and  of  the 
committee  of  heads  of  tribes  appointed  for  the  purpose  of  dividing 
the  land  of  Canaan  (Num.  xxxiv.  16  sqq.), — in  the  exact  form  in 
which  they  had  been  drawn  up  for  public  use.  This  conjecture  is 
rendered  very  natural  by  the  contents  and  form  of  the  Pentateuch. 
The  Pentateuch  contains  historical  narrative  and  law,  answer- 
ing to  the  character  of  the  divine  revelation,  which  consisted  in 
historical  facts,  and  received  a  development  in  accordance  with 
the  times.  And  on  closer  inspection  we  find  that  several  different 
elements  may  be  distinguished  in  each  of  these.  The  historical 
contents  are  divisible  into  an  annalistic  or  monumental  portion,  and 
into  prophetico-historical  accounts.  The  former  includes  the  simple 
notices  of  the  most  important  events  from  the  creation  of  the  world  to 
the  death  of  Moses,  with  their  exact  chronological,  ethnographical, 
and  geographical  data ;  also  the  numerous  genealogical  documents 
introduced  into  the  history.  To  the  latter  belong  statements, 
whether  shorter  or  longer,  respecting  those  revelations  and  promises 


520  CONCLUDING  REMARKS  ON  THE 

of  God,  by  which  the  Creator  of  the  heaven  and  the  earth  prepared 
the  way  from  the  very  earliest  time  for  the  redemption  of  the  fallen 
human  race,  and  which,  after  laying  the  foundation  for  the  Old 
Testament  kingdom  of  God  by  the  guidance  of  the  patriarchs  and 
the  redemption  of  Israel  out  of  the  bondage  of  Egypt,  He  eventu- 
ally carried  out  at  Sinai  by  the  conclusion  of  a  covenant  and  the 
giving  of  a  law.  In  the  same  way,  we  may  distinguish  a  twofold 
element  in  the  legal  portion  of  the  Pentateuch.  The  kernel  of 
the  Sinaitic  legislation  is  to  be  found  in  the  decalogue,  with  the 
moral  and  rightful  conditions  upon  the  basis  of  which  the  Lord 
concluded  the  covenant  with  Israel.  The  religious  and  moral 
truths  and  commandments,  which,  as  being  the  absolute  demands 
of  the  holiness  and  justice,  the  love  and  mercy  of  God,  constitute 
the  very  essence  of  true  religion,  are  surrounded  in  the  covenant 
economy  of  the  Old  Testament  by  certain  religious  statutes  and 
institutions,  which  were  imposed  upon  the  people  of  God  simply 
for  the  time  of  its  infancy,  and  constituted  that  "  shadow  of  things 
to  come"  which  was  to  pass  away  when  the  "body"  appeared. 
This  "  shadow  "  embraces  all  the  special  theocratic  ordinances  and 
precepts  of  the  so-called  Levitical  law  (whether  ecclesiastical,  disci- 
plinary, or  magisterial),  in  which  religious  and  ethical  ideas  were 
symbolically  incorporated ;  so  that  they  contained  within  them 
eternal  truths,  whilst  their  earthly  form  was  to  pass  away.  These 
covenant  statutes  are  so  intimately  bound  up  with  the  general 
religious  doctrines  and  the  purely  moral  commands,  by  virtue  of 
their  symbolical  significance,  that  in  many  respects  they  interlace 
one  another,  the  moral  commands  being  enclosed  and  pervaded  by 
the  covenant  statutes,  and  the  latter  again  being  sanctified  and 
transformed  by  the  former,  so  that  the  entire  law  assumes  the  form 
of  a  complete  organic  whole.  A  similar  organic  connection  is  also 
apparent  between  the  historical  and  legal  constituents  of  the  Penta- 
teuch. The  historical  narrative  not  only  supplied  the  framework 
or  outward  setting  for  the  covenant  legislation,  but  it  also  prepared 
the  way  for  that  legislation,  just  as  God  Himself  prepared  the  way 
for  concluding  the  covenant  with  Israel  by  His  guidance  of  the 
human  race  and  the  patriarchs  of  Israel ;  and  it  so  pervades  every 
portion  of  it  also,  that,  on  the  one  hand,  the  historical  circumstances 
form  the  groundwork  for  the  legal  institutions,  and  on  the  other 
hand  a  light  is  thrown  by  the  historical  occurrences  upon  the  cove- 
nant ordinances  and  laws.  Just  as  nature  and  spirit  interpenetrate 
each  other  in  the  world  around  us  and  in  human  life,  and  the 


COMPOSITION  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH.  521 

spirit  not  only  comes  to  view  in  the  life  of  nature,  but  transforms 
it  at  the  same  time ;  so  has  God  planted  His  kingdom  of  grace  in 
the  natural  order  of  the  world,  that  nature  may  be  sanctified  by 
grace.  But,  notwithstanding  this  organic  connection  between  the 
various  constituents  of  the  Pentateuch,  from  the  very  nature  of 
the  case  not  only  are  the  historical  and  legal  portions  kept  quite 
distinct  from  one  another  in  many  passages,  but  the  distinctions 
between  these  two  constituents  are  here  and  there  brought  very 
clearly  out  to  view. 

The  material  differences  necessarily  determined  in  various  ways 
the  form  of  the  narrative,  the  phraseology,  and  even  the  words 
employed.  In  the  historical  portions  many  words  and  expressions 
occur  which  are  never  met  with  in  the  legal  sections,  and  vice 
versa.  The  same  remark  also  applies  to  the  different  portions  in 
which  we  have  either  historical  narrative,  or  the  promulgation  of 
laws.  In  addition  to  this,  we  might  reasonably  expect  to  find  whole 
sections  also,  in  which  the  ideas  and  verbal  peculiarities  of  the 
different  constituents  are  combined.  And  this  is  really  the  case. 
The  differences  stand  out  very  sharply  in  the  earliest  chapters  of 
Genesis,  where  the  account  of  paradise  and  the  fall,  together  with 
the  promise  of  the  victory  of  the  seed  of  the  woman  over  the  ser- 
pent, which  contains  the  germ  of  all  future  revelations  of  God 
(chap.  ii.  4  sqq.),  is  appended  immediately  to  the  history  of  the 
creation  of  the  world  (chap.  i.  1-ii.  3)  ;  whilst  in  the  mode  of 
narration  it  differs  considerably  from  the  style  of  the  first  chapter. 
Whereas  in  chap.  i.  the  Creator  of  the  heaven  and  the  earth  is 
called  EbJiim  simply  ;  in  the  history  of  paradise  and  the  fall,  not  to 
mention  other  differences,  we  meet  with  the  composite  name  Jehovah 
Elohim ;  and,  after  this,  the  two  names  Elohim  and  Jehovah  are 
used  interchangeably,  so  that  in  many  chapters  the  former  only 
occurs,  and  in  others  again  only  the  latter,  until  the  statement  in 
Ex.  vi.,  that  God  appeared  to  Moses  and  commissioned  him  to  bring 
the  people  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt,  after  which  the  name  Jehovah 
predominates,  so  that  henceforth,  with  but  few  exceptions,  Elohim 
is  only  used  in  an  appellative  sense. 

Upon  this  interchange  in  the  names  of  God  in  the  book  of 
Genesis,  modern  critics  liave  built  up  their  hypothesis  as  to  the 
composition  of  Genesis,  and  in  fact  of  the  entire  Pentateuch,  either 
from  different  documents,  or  from  repeated  supplementary  addi- 
tions, in  accordance  with  which  they  discover  an  outward  cause  for 
the  change  of  names,  viz.  the  variety  of  editors,  instead  of  deducing 


CONCLUDING  EEMARKS  ON  THE 

it  from  the  different  meanings  of  the  names  themselves  ;  whilst  they 
also  adduce,  in  support  of  their  view,  the  fact  that  certain  ideas 
and  expressions  change  in  connection  with  the  name  of  God.  The 
fact  is  obvious  enough.  But  the  change  in  the  use  of  the  different 
names  of  God  is  associated  with  the  gradual  development  of  the 
saving  purposes  of  God ;  and  as  we  have  already  shown  in  vol.  i. 
pp.  73  sqq.,  the  names  Elohim  and  Jehovah  are  expressive  of  differ- 
ent relations  on  the  part  of  God  to  the  world.  Now,  as  God  did 
not  reveal  Himself  in  the  full  significance  of  His  name  Jehovah  till 
the  time  of  the  exodus  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt,  and  the  conclusion 
of  the  covenant  at  Sinai,  we  could  expect  nothing  else  than  what  we 
actually  find  in  Genesis,  namely,  that  this  name  is  not  used  by  the 
author  of  the  book  of  Genesis  before  the  call  of  Abraham,  except 
in  connection  with  such  facts  as  were  directly  preparatory  to  the  call 
of  Abraham  to  be  the  father  of  the  covenant  nation  ;  and  that  even 
in  the  history  of  the  patriarchs,  in  which  it  predominates  from  Gen. 
xii.— xvi.,  it  is  used  less  frequently  again  after  Jehovah  revealed 
Himself  to  Abraham  as  El  Shaddai,  and  other  titles  of  God  sprang 
out  of  the  continued  manifestations  of  God  to  the  patriarchs,  which 
could  take  the  place  of  that  name.  (For  more  detailed  remarks,  see 
vol.  i.  pp.  330  sqq.).  It  would  not  have  been  by  any  means  strange, 
therefore,  if  the  name  Jehovah  had  not  occurred  at  all  in  the  account 
of  the  creation  of  the  world,  in  the  genealogies  of  the  patriarchs  of 
the  primeval  and  preparatory  age  (Gen.  v.  and  xi.),  in  the  table  of 
nations  (Gen.  x.),  in  the  account  of  the  negotiations  of  Abraham 
with  the  Hittites  concerning  the  purchase  of  the  cave  of  Machpelah 
for  a  family  sepulchre  (Gen.  xxiii.),  in  the  notices  respecting  Esau 
and  the  Edomitish  tribe-princes  and  kings  (Gen.  xxxvi.),  and  other 
narratives  of  similar  import.  Nevertheless  we  find  it  in  the  genea- 
logy in  Gen.  v.  29,  and  in  the  table  of  nations  in  Gen.  x.  9,  where 
the  critics,  in  order  to  save  their  hypothesis,  are  obliged  to  have 
recourse  to  an  assumption  of  glosses,  or  editorial  revisions.  They 
have  dealt  still  more  violently  with  Gen.  xvii.  1.  There  Jehovah 
appears  to  Abram,  and  manifests  Himself  to  him  as  El  Shaddai, 
from  which  it  is  very  evident  that  the  name  El  Shaddai  simply 
expresses  one  particular  feature  in  the  manifestation  of  Jehovah, 
and  describes  a  preliminary  stage,  anticipatory  of  the  full  develop- 
ment of  the  nature  of  the  absolute  God,  as  expressed  in  the  name 
Jehovah,  This  is  put  beyond  all  doubt  by  the  declaration  of  God 
to  Moses  in  Ex.  vi.  3,  "  I  appeared  to  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob, 
as  El  Shaddai,  and  by  My  name  Jehovah  was  I  not  known  to  them." 


COMPOSITION  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH.  523 

Even  Astruc  observes,  with  reference  to  these  words,  "  The  passage 
in  Exodus,  when  properly  understood,  does  not  prove  that  the  name 
of  Jehovah  was  a  name  of  God  unknown  to  the  patriarchs,  and 
revealed  for  the  first  time  to  Moses  ;  it  simply  proves  that  God  had 
not  shown  the  patriarchs  the  full  extent  of  the  meaning  of  this 
name,  as  He  had  made  it  known  to  Moses."  The  modern  critics, 
on  the  other  hand,  have  erased  Jehovah  from  the  text  in  Gen.  xvii. 
1,  and  substituted  Elohim  in  its  place,  and  then  declare  El  Shaddai 
synonymous  with  Elohim,  whilst  they  have  so  perverted  Ex.  vi.  3 
as  to  make  the  name  Jehovah  utterly  unknown  to  the  patriarchs. 
By  similar  acts  of  violence  they  have  mangled  the  text  in  very 
many  other  passages,  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  the  distinc- 
tion between  the  Elohim  and  Jehovah  documents  ;  and  yet  for  all 
that  they  cannot  escape  the  admission,  that  there  are  certain  por- 
tions or  sections  of  the  book  of  Genesis  in  which  the  separation  is 
impossible. 

It  is  just  the  same  with  the  supposed  "  favourite  expressions" 
of  the  Elohistic  and  Jehovistic  sections,  as  with  the  names  of  God. 
"  There  are  certain  favourite  expressions,  it  is  said,  which  are  com- 
mon to  the  Elohistic  portions  ;  and  the  same  things  are  frequently 
called  by  different  names  in  the  Elohistic  and  Jehovistic  sections. 
Among  the  Elohistic  expressions  are  :  njriK  (possession),  D''n^iD  p« 
(land  of  the  stranger  s  sojourn),  DD^nnii?,  iV^Jpij,  njn  Di*n  DVJIi  (the  self- 
same day),  Padan-Aram  (the  Jehovistic  for  this  is  always  (?)  Aram- 
Naharaim,  or  simply  Aram),^  nan*!  nns,  nn3  D''ipn  (the  Jehovistic  is 
n^nn  ni3)  ;  wherever  the  name  Elohim  occurs,  these  expressions 
also  appear  as  its  inseparable  satellites."  This  statement  is  in  part 
incorrect,  and  not  in  accordance  with  fact ;  and  even  where  there  is 
any  foundation  for  it,  it  really  proves  nothing.  In  the  first  place, 
it  is  not  correct  that  njnx  and  D''i;iiD  px  are  only  to  be  met  with  in 
Elohistic  portions.  In  the  very  first  passage  in  which  we  meet  with 
this  word  in  the  Pentateuch  (Gen.  xvii.  8),  it  is  not  Elohim,  but 
Jehovah,  who  appears  as  El  Shaddai,  and  promises  Abraham  and 
his  seed  the  land  of  his  pilgrimage,  the  land  of  Canaan,  rh)V  r\^^^b. 

^  The  actual  fact  is,  that  Aram-Ndharaim  only  occurs  twice  in  the  Penta- 
teuch, viz.  Gen.  xxiv.  10  and  Deut.  xxiii.  5,  for  which  Aram  alone  occurs  in 
Num.  xxiii.  7,  which  is  well  known  to  apply  not  merely  to  Mesopotamia,  but  to 
Syria  as  well,  and  is  used  here  simply  as  a  poetical  term  for  Aram-NaJiaraim. 
Moreover,  Padan-Aram  and  Aram-Naharaim  are  not  identical ;  but  the  former 
merely  denotes  one  particular  district  of  "  Aram  of  the  two  rivers,"  or  Meso- 
potamia. 


524  CONCLUDING  REMARKS  ON  THE 

This  passage  is  clearly  pointed  to  in  Gen.  xlviii.  4.  In  addition 
to  this,  the  word  achuzzah  occurs  in  Gen.  xxiii.  4,  9,  20,  xlix.  30, 
1.  13,  in  connection  with  the  family  sepulchre  which  Abraham  had 
acquired  as  a  possession  by  purchase  ;  also  in  the  laws  concerning 
the  sale  and  redemption  of  landed  property  (Lev.  xxv.  and  xxvii. 
very  frequently),  and  in  those  concerning  the  division  of  the  land 
as  a  possession  among  the  tribes  and  families  of  Israel  (Num.  xxvii. 
7,  xxxii.  5  sqq.,  xxxv.  2,  8)  ;  also  in  Lev.  xxv.  34  and  Gen.  xxxvi. 
43, — in  both  passages  with  reference  to  property  or  a  fixed  landed 
possession,  for  which  there  was  no  other  word  in  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage that  could  be  used  in  these  passages ;  not  to  mention  the 
fact,  that  Stdhelin,  Knobel,  and  others,  pronounce  Num.  xxxii.  o2 
a  Jehovistic  passage.  So  again  the  expressions  n''"]3  D''ipn  (to  set  up 
a  covenant)  and  DHi'ip  (in  their  generations)  occur  in  Gen.  xvii.  7 
in  a  Jehovistic  framework ;  for  it  was  not  JElohim,  but  Jehovah, 
who  appeared  to  Abram  (see  ver.  1),  to  set  up  (not  conclude)  His 
covenant  with  him  and  his  posterity  as  an  everlasting  covenant, 
according  to  their  generations.  To  set  up  (i.e,  realize,  carry  out) 
a  covenant,  and  to  conclude  a  covenant,  are  certainly  two  distinct 
ideas. — In  Gen.  xlvii.  27,  again,  and  Lev.  xxvi.  9,  we  meet  with 
nnni  nna  in  two  sections,  which  are  pronounced  Jehovistic.  The 
other  three,  no  doubt,  occur  in  Genesis  in  connection  with  Elohim  ; 
but  the  expression,  "  in  the  self-same  day,"  could  not  be  expected 
in  Jehovistic  sections,  for  the  simple  reason,  that  the  time  of  the 
revelations  and  promises  of  God  is  not  generally  reckoned  by  day 
and  hour.  "  After  his  kind"  is  only  met  with  in  four  sections  in 
the  whole  of  the  Pentateuch, — in  the  accounts  of  the  creation  and 
that  of  the  flood  (Gen.  i.  and  vi.  vii.),  and  in  the  laws  concerning 
clean  and  unclean  beasts  (Lev.  xi.  and  Deut.  xiv.),  where  it  is 
simply  the  species  of  animals  that  are  referred  to.  Can  this  word 
then  be  called  a  favourite  Elohistic  expression,  which  constantly 
appears  like  an  inseparable  satellite,  wherever  the  name  Elohim 
occurs?  The  same  remarks  apply  to  other  words  and  phrases 
described  as  Elohistic :  e.g.  tholedoth  (which  stands  at  the  head  of 
a  Jehovistic  account,  however,  in  Gen.  ii.  4),  ^'fathers  house^''  " in 
their  families"  (mishpachoth),  and  many  others.  But  just  as  such 
expressions  as  these  are  not  to  be  expected  in  the  prophetico-his- 
torical  sections,  for  the  simple  reason  that  the  ideas  which  they 
express  belong  to  a  totally  different  sphere,  so,  on  the  other  hand, 
a  considerable  number  of  notions  and  words,  which  are  associated 
with  the  visible  manifestations  of  God,  the  promises  to  the  patriarchs^ 


I 


COMPOSITION  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH.  525 

their  worship,  etc.,  are  found  in  the  book  of  Genesis  always  in  con- 
nection with  the  name  JeJwvah :  see,  for  example,  njn^  m2  i^ip^ 
(ni^V)  r6)V  r^^Vrj,  nhan  nn_,  and  others  of  the  same  kind.  '  And  yet 
the  last  two  occur  in  the  laws  of  the  middle  books,  which  the  critics 
attribute  to  the  Elohist  much  more  frequently  than  many  of  the 
so-called  Elohistic  expressions  and  formulas  of  the  book  of  Genesis. 
This  fact  clearly  shows,  that  there  are  no  such  things  as  favourite 
expressions  of  the  Elohist  and  Jehovist,  but  that  the  words  are 
always  adapted  to  the  subject.  In  the  covenant  statutes  of  the 
middle  books,  we  find  Elohistic  and  Jehovistic  expressions  combined, 
because  the  economy  of  the  Sinaitic  covenant  was  anticipated  on 
the  one  hand  by  the  patriarchal  revelations  of  Jehovah  the  cove- 
nant God,  and  estabhshed  on  the  other  hand  upon  the  natural 
foundations  of  the  Israelitish  commonwealth.  The  covenant  which 
Jehovah  concluded  with  the  people  of  Israel  at  Sinai  (Ex.  xxiv.) 
was  simply  the  setting  up  and  full  realization  of  the  covenant  which 
He  made  with  Abram  (Gen.  xv.),  and  had  already  begun  to  set  up 
with  him  by  the  promise  of  a  son,  and  the  institution  of  circum- 
cision as  the  covenant  sign  (Gen.  xvii.).  The  indispensable  condi- 
tion of  membership  in  the  covenant  was  circumcision,  which  Jehovah 
commanded  to  Abraham  when  He  made  Himself  known  to  him  as 
Ul  Sliaddai  (Gen.  xvii.),  and  in  connection  with  which  we  meet 
for  the  first  time  with  the  legal  formulas,  "  a  statute  for  ever,"  "  in 
your  generations,"  and  "  that  soul  shall  be  cut  off,"  which  recur  so 
constantly  in  the  covenant  statutes  of  the  middle  books,  but  so 
arranged,  that  the  expression  "  a  statute  for  ever"  is  never  used 
in  connection  with  general  religious  precepts  or  purely  moral  com- 
mandments, the  eternal  significance  of  which  did  not  need  to  be 
enjoined,  since  it  naturally  followed  from  the  unchangeable  holiness 
and  justice  of  the  eternal  God,  whilst  this  could  not  be  assumed 
without  further  ground  of  the  statutory  laws  and  ordinances  of  the 
covenant.  But  these  covenant  ordinances  also  had  their  roots  in 
the  natural  order  of  the  world  and  of  the  national  life.  The  nation 
of  Israel  which  sprang  from  the  twelve  sons  of  Israel  by  natural 
generation,  received  its  division  into  tribes,  and  the  constitution 
founded  upon  this,  as  a  covenant  nation  and  congregation  ot  Je- 
hovah. The  numbering  of  the  people  was  taken  in  tribes,  accord- 
ing to  the  families  and  fathers'  houses  of  the  different  tribes ;  and 
the  land  of  Canaan,  which  was  promised  them  for  an  inheritance, 
was  to  be  divided  among  the  tribes,  with  special  reference  to  the 
number  and  magnitude  of  their  families.     It  is  perfectly  natural. 


526  CONCLUDING  REMARKS  ON  THE 


4 


II 


therefore,  that  in  the  laws  and  statements  concerning  these  things, 
words  and  formularies  should  be  repeated  which  already  occur  in 
the  book  of  GeQesis  in  connection  with  the  genealogical  notices. 

Modern  critics,  as  is  well  known,  regard  the  whole  of  the  Sinaitic 
legislation,  from  Ex.  xxv.  to  Num.  x.  28,  as  an  essential  part  of  the 
original  work,  with  the  exception  of  Ex.  xx.~xxiii..  Lev.  xvii.-xx. 
and  xxvi.,  and  a  few  verses  in  Lev.  x.,  xxiii.,  xxiv.,  xxv.,  and  Num. 
iv.  and  viii.  Now,  as  a  great  variety  of  things  are  noticed  in  this 
law — such  as  tlie  building  and  setting  up  of  the  tabernacle,  the 
description  of  the  priests'  clothes,  the  order  of  sacrifice — which  are 
not  mentioned  again  in  the  other  parts  of  the  Pentateuch,  it  was«fl| 
very  easy  for  Knohel  to  fill  several  pages  with  expressions  from 
the  original  Elohistic  work,  which  are  neither  to  be  found  in  the 
Jehovistic  historical  narratives,  nor  in  the  general  commands  of  a 
religious  and  moral  character,  by  simply  collecting  together  all  the 
names  of  these  particular  things.  But  what  does  such  a  collection 
prove  ?  Nothing  further  than  that  the  contents  of  the  Pentateuch 
are  very  varied,  and  the  same  things  are  not  repeated  throughout. 
Could  we  expect  to  find  beams,  pillars,  coverings,  tapestries,  and  the 
vessels  of  the  sanctuary,  or  priests'  dresses  and  sacrificial  objects, 
mentioned  in  the  ten  commandments,  or  among  the  rights  of  Israel 
(Ex.  xx.-xxiii.),  or  in  the  laws  of  marriage  and  chastity  and  the 
moral  commandments  (Lev.  xvii.-xx.)  ?  With  the  exception  of  the 
absence  of  certain  expressions  and  formulas,  which  are  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  the  covenant  statutes,  the  critics  are  unable  to  adduce 
any  other  ground  for  excluding  the  general  religious  and  moral 
commandments  from  the  legislation  of  the  so-called  original  work, 
than  the  a  priori  axiom,  "  The  Elohist  had  respect  simply  to  the 
theocratic  law ;  and  such  laws  as  are  introduced  in  Ex.  xxi.-xxiii., 
in  connection  with  moral  and  civil  life,  lay  altogether  outside  his 
plan."  These  are  assertions,  not  proofs.  The  use  of  words  in  the 
Pentateuch  could  only  furnish  conclusive  evidence  that  it  had  been 
composed  by  various  authors,  if  the  assertion  were  a  well  founded 
one,  that  different  expressions  are  employed  for  the  same  thing  in 
different  parts  of  the  work.  But  all  that  has  hitherto  been  adduced 
in  proof  of  this  amounts  to  nothing  more  than  a  few  words,  chiefly 
in  the  early  chapters  of  Genesis ;  whilst  it  is  assumed  at  the  same 
time  that  Gen.  ii.  4  sqq.  contains  a  second  account  of  the  creation, 
whereas  it  simply  gives  a  description  of  paradise,  and  a  more  minute 
account  of  the  creation  of  man  than  is  to  be  found  in  Gen.  i.,  the 
difference  in  the  point  of  view  requiring  different  words. 


COMPOSITION  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH.  $27 

To  this  we  have  to  add  the  fact,  that  by  no  means  a  small 
number  of  sections  exhibit,  so  far  as  the  language  is  concerned,  the 
peculiarities  of  the  two  original  documents  or  main  sources,  and 
render  a  division  utterly  impossible.  The  critics  have  therefore 
found  themselves  compelled  to  assume  that  there  was  a  third  or  even 
a  fourth  source,  to  which  they  refer  whatever  cannot  be  assigned 
to  the  other  two.  This  assumption  is  a  pure  offshoot  of  critical 
difficulty,  whilst  the  fact  itself  is  a  proof  that  the  Pentateuch  is 
founded  upon  unity  of  language,  and  that  the  differences  which 
occur  here  and  there  arise  for  the  most  part  from  the  variety  and 
diversity  of  the  actual  contents ;  whilst  in  a  very  few  instances 
they  may  be  attributable  to  the  fact  that  Moses  availed  himself  of 
existing  writings  in  the  composition  of  the  book  of  Genesis,  and  in 
tlie  middle  books  inserted  public  documents  without  alteration  in 
his  historical  account. 

The  other  proofs  adduced,  for  the  purpose  of  supportinsf  the 
evidence  from  language,  viz.  the  frequent  repetitions  of  the  same 
thing  and  the  actual  discrepancies^  are  even  weaker  still.  No  doubt 
the  Pentateuch  abounds  in  repetitions.  The  longest  and  most 
important  is  the  description  of  the  tabernacle,  where  we  have,  first 
of  all,  the  command  to  prepare  this  sanctuary  given  in  Ex.  xxv.— 
xxxi.,  with  a  detailed  description  of  all  the  different  parts,  and  all 
the  articles  of  furniture,  as  well  as  of  the  priests'  clothing  and  the 
consecration  of  the  priests  and  the  altar ;  and  then  again,  in  Ex. 
xxxv.-xxxix.  and  Lev.  viii.,  a  detailed  account  of  the  fulfilment  of 
these  instructions  in  almost  the  same  words.  The  holy  candlestick 
is  mentioned  five  times  (Ex.  xxv.  31-40,  xxvii.  20,  21,  xxx.  7,  8, 
Lev.  xxiv.  1-4,  and  Num.  viii.  1-4) ;  the  command  not  to  eat 
blood  occurs  as  many  as  eight  times  (Gen.  ix.  4 ;  Lev.  iii.  17,  vii. 
26,  27,  xvii.  10-14;  Deut.  xii.  16,  23,  24,  and  xv.  23),  and  on 
the  first  three  occasions,  at  all  events,  in  passages  belonging  to  the 
so-called  original  work.  Now,  if  these  repetitions  have  not  been 
regarded  by  any  of  the  critics,  with  the  exception  of  J,  Popper,  as 
furnishing  proofs  of  difference  of  authorship,  what  right  can  we 
have  to  adduce  other  repetitions  of  a  similar  kind  as  possessing  any 
such  significance  ? — But  lastly,  the  critics  have  involved  themselves 
in  almost  incomprehensible  contradictions,  through  the  supposed 
contradictions  in  the  Pentateuch.  Some  of  them,.^.^.  Stdhelin  and 
Bertheau,  think  these  discrepancies  only  apparent,  or  at  least  as  of 
such  a  character  that  the  last  editor  saw  no  discrepancies  in  them, 
otherwise  he  would  have  expunged  them.     Others,  such  as  Knohel 


528  CONCLUDING  REMARKS  ON  THE 

and  Hupfeld^  place  them  in  the  foreground,  as  the  main  proofs 
of  a  plurality  of  authors ;  ^vhilst  Hupfeld  especially,  by  a  truly 
inquisitorial  process,  has  made  even  the  smallest  differences  into 
irreconcilable  contradictions.  Yet,  for  all  that,  he  maintains  that 
the  Pentateuch,  in  its  present  form,  is  a  work  characterized  by 
unity,  arranged  and  carried  out  according  to  a  definite  plan,  in 
which  the  different  portions  are  so  arranged  and  connected  together, 
"  with  an  intelligent  regard  to  connection  and  unity  or  plan,"  yea, 
"  dovetailed  together  in  so  harmonious  a  w^ay,  that  they  have  the 
deceptive  appearance  of  a  united  whole  "  {Hupfeld,  die  Quellen  der 
Genes,  p.  196).  In  working  up  the  different  sources,  the  editor,  it 
is  said,  "  did  not  hesitate  to  make  systematic  corrections  of  the  one 
to  bring  it  into  harmony  with  the  other,"  as,  for  example,  in  the 
names  Abram  and  Sarai,  which  he  copied  from  the  original  docu- 
ment into  the  Jehovistic  portions  before  Gen.  xvii.,  because  "  he 
would  not  allow  of  any  discrepancy  between  his  sources  in  these 
points,  and  in  fact  could  not  have  allowed  it  without  a  manifest 
contradiction,  and  the  consequent  confusion  of  his  readers"  (p.  198). 
How  then  does  it  square  with  so  intelligent  a  procedure,  to  assume 
that  there  are  irreconcilable  contradictions  in  the  work  ?  An  editor 
who  worked  with  so  much  intelligence  and  reflection  would  never 
have  left  actual  contradictions  standing ;  and  modern  critics  have 
been  able  to  discover  them  simply  because  they  judge  the  biblical 
writings  according  to  modern  notions,  and  start  in  their  operations 
from  a  fundamental  opinion  which  is  directly  at  variance  with  the 
revelation  of  the  Bible. 

The  strength  of  the  opposition  to  the  unity  and  Mosaic  author- 
ship of  the  Pentateuch  arises  much  less  from  the  peculiarities  of 
form,  which  the  critics  have  placed  in  the  foreground,  than  from 
the  offence  which  they  take  at  the  contents  of  the  books  of  Moses, 
which  are  irreconcilable  with  the  naturalism  of  the  modern  views 
of  the  world.  To  the  leaders  of  modern  criticism,  not  only  is  the 
spuriousness,  or  post-Mosaic  origin  of  the  Pentateuch,  an  established 
fact,  but  the  gradual  rise  of  the  Mosaic  laws  in  connection  with 
the  natural  development  of  the  Hebrew  people,  without  any  direct 
or  supernatural  interposition  on  the  part  of  God,  is  also  firmly 
established  a  prion  on  dogmatical  grounds.  This  is  openly  expressed 
by  De  Wette  in  the  three  first  editions  of  his  Introduction,  in  which 
he  opens  the  critical  inquiry  concerning  the  Pentateuch  with  this 
observation  (§  145) :  "  Many  occurrences  are  opposed  to  the  laws 
of  nature,  and  presuppose  a  direct  interposition  on  the  part  o^ 


1 


COMPOSITION  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH.  529 

God;"  and  then  proceeds  to  say,  that  "if  to  an  educated  mind  it 
is  a  decided  fact  that  such  miracles  have  never  really  occurred  the 
question  arises  whether,  perhaps,  they  may  have  appeared  to  do  so 
to  the  eye-witnesses  and  persons  immediately  concerned;  but  to 
this  also  we  must  give  a  negative  reply.  And  thus  we  are  brought 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  narrative  is  not  contemporaneous,  or 
derived  from  contemporaneous  sources."  Ewald  has  expressed  his 
naturalistic  views,  which  acknowledge  no  supernatural  revelation 
from  God,  in  his  "  History  of  the  People  of  Israel,"  and  developed 
the  gradual  formation  of  the  Pentateuch  from  the  principles  involved 
in  these  fundamental  views.  But  just  as  De  Wette  expressed  tliis 
candid  confession  in  a  much  more  cautious  and  disguised  manner 
in  the  later  editions  of  his  Introduction,  so  have  his  successors 
endeavoured  more  and  more  to  conceal  the  naturalistic  background 
of  their  critical  operations,  and  restricted  themselves  to  arguments, 
the  weakness  and  worthlessness  of  which  they  themselves  admit  in 
connection  with  critical  questions  which  do  not  affect  their  natu- 
ralistic views.  So  long  as  biblical  criticism  is  fettered  by  naturalism, 
it  will  nev6r  rise  to  a  recognition  of  the  genuineness  and  internal 
unity  of  the  Pentateuch.  For  if  the  miraculous  acts  of  the  living 
God  recorded  in  it  are  not  true,  and  did  not  actually  occur,  the 
account  of  them  cannot  have  come  down  from  eye-witnesses,  but 
can  only  be  myths,  which  grew  up  in  the  popular  belief  long  after 
the  events  referred  to.  And  if  there  is  no  prophetic  foresight  of 
the  future  produced  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  Moses  cannot  have  fore- 
told the  rejection  of  Israel  and  their  dispersion  among  the  heathen 
even  before  their  entrance  into  Canaan,  whereas  they  did  not  take 
place  till  many  centuries  afterwards. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  reality  of  the  supernatural  revelations 
of  God,  together  with  miracles  and  prophecies,  be  admitted,  not 
only  are  the  contents  of  the  Pentateuch  in  harmony  with  its  Mosaic 
authorship,  but  even  its  formal  arrangement  can  be  understood  and 
scientifically  vindicated,  provided  only  we  suppose  the  work  to  have 
originated  in  the  following  manner.  After  the  exodus  of  the  tribes 
of  Israel  "from  Egypt,  and  their  adoption  as  the  people  of  Jehovah 
through  the  conclusion  of  the  covenant  at  Sinai,  when  Moses  had 
been  commanded  by  God  to  write  down  the  covenant  rights'(Ex. 
xxiv.  4,  and  xxxiv.  27),  and  then  formed  the  resolution  not  only  to 
ensure  the  laws  which  the  Lord  had  given  to  the  people  through 
his  mediation  against  alteration  and  distortion,  and  hand  them  down 
to  futurity  by  committing  them  to  writing,  but  to  write  down  all 

PENT. — VOL.  III.  2  L 


530  CONCLUDING  REMARKS  ON  THE 

the  great  and  glorious  things  that  the  Lord  had  done  for  His 
people,  for  the  instruction  of  his  own  and  succeeding  generations, 
and  set  himself  to  carry  out  this  resolution ;  he  collected  together 
the  traditions  of  the  olden  time,  which  had  been  handed  down  in 
Israel  from  the  days  of  the  patriarchs,  partly  orally,  and  partly  in 
writings  and  records,  for  the  purpose  of  combining  them  into  a 
preliminary  history  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  which  was  founded  by 
the  conclusion  of  the  covenant  at  Sinai.  Accordingly,  in  all  prob- 
ability during  the  stay  at  Sinai,  in  the  five  or  six  months  which 
were  occupied  in  building  the  tabernacle,  he  wrote  not  only  the 
book  of  Genesis,  but  the  history  of  the  deliverance  of  Israel  out  of 
Egypt  and  the  march  to  Sinai  (Ex.  xix.),  to  which  the  decalogue, 
with  the  book  of  the  covenant  (Ex.  xx.-xxiii.),  is  attached,  according 
to  that  plan  of  the  kingdom  of  God  which  had  then  been  fully 
revealed,  or,  in  other  words,  from  a  theocratic  point  of  view.  As 
he  had  written  the  covenant  rights  in  a  book  by  the  command  of 
God,  as  a  preliminary  to  the  conclusion  of  the  covenant  itself  (Ex. 
xxiv.  4),  there  can  be  no  doubt  whatever  that  he  did  not  merely 
publish  .to  the  people  by  word  of  mouth  the  very  elaborate  revelation 
and  directions  of  God  concerning  the  construction  of  the  tabernacle 
and  the  apparatus  of  worship,  which  he  had  received  upon  the 
mountain  (Ex.  xxv.-xxxi.),  as  well  as  all  the  rest  of  the  laws,  but 
either  committed  them  to  writing  himself  directly  after  he  had 
received  them  from  the  Lord,  or  had  them  written  out  by  one  of 
his  assistants,  and  collected  together  for  the  purpose  of  forming 
them  eventually  into  a  complete  work.  We  may  make  the  same 
assumption  with  reference  to  the  most  important  events  which 
occurred  during  the  forty  years'  journey  through  the  desert,  so 
that,  on  the  arrival  of  the  camp  in  the  steppes  of  Moab,  the  whole 
of  the  historical  and  legal  materials  for  the  three  middle  books  of  the 
Pentateuch  were  already  collected  together,  and  all  that  remained 
to  be  done  was  to  form  them  into  a  united  whole,  and  give  them  a 
final  revision.  The  collection,  arrangement,  and  final  working  up 
of  these  materials  would  be  accomplished  in  a  very  short  time,  since 
Moses  had,  at  all  events,  the  priests  and  shoterim  by  his  side. — All 
this  had  probably  taken  place  before  the  last  addresses  of  Moses, 
which  compose  the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  so  that  nothing  further 
remained  to  be  done  but  to  WTite  down  these  addresses,  and  append 
them  as  a  fifth  book  to  the  .four  already  in  existence.  With  this 
the  writing  of  "  all  the  words  of  this  book  of  the  law"  was  finished, 
so  that  the  whole  book  of  the  law  could  be  handed  over  in  a 


COMPOSITION  OF  THE  PENTATEUCH.  531 

complete  state  to  the  priests,  to  be  properly  taken  care  of  by  them 
(Deut.  xxxi.  24  sqq.). 

A  copy  of  the  song  of  Moses  was  added  to  this  written  work,  in 
all  probability  immediately  after  it  had  been  deposited  by  the  side 
of  the  ark  of  the  covenant ;  and,  after  his  death,  the  blessing  pro- 
nounced upon  the  tribes  before  his  departure  was  also  committed 
to  writing.  Finally,  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan,  possibly  on  the 
renewal  of  the  covenant  under  Joshua,  an  account  of  the  death  of 
Moses  was  added  to  these  last  two  testimonies  of  the  man  of  God, 
and  adopted  along  with  them,  in  the  form  of  an  appendix,  into  his 
book  of  the  law. 


END  OF  VOL.  IIJ. 


MUKKAY  AND  GIBB,  PRINTERS,  EDINBUROH. 


I 


'mot^ii  ^ubli^6ttr  b»  C.  $jr  C,  Clarfe,  etiiubursf). 


MESSRS  CLARK  ^^^  /^  ^jf^r  ^  Selection  of  Eight  Volumes 
from  the  followi7tg  List  of  Works  (chiefly  forming  the 
Biblical  Cabinet,  the  first  series  of  tra7islations  published 
by  them), 

For  ONK  Guinea,  remitted  with  order. 
The  price  affixed  is  that  at  which  they  can  be  had  separately, 
which  is  also  much  reduced. 

Ernesti's  Principles  of  Biblical  Interpretation  of  New  Testament.  Trans- 
lated by  Bishop  Terrot.     2  vols.,  8s. 

Philological  Tracts.  3  vols.,  4s.  each. 
Vol.  I.— Rossi  and  Pfannkuche  on  the  Language  of  Palestine  in  the  Age  of  Christ ; 
Planck  on  the  Nature  and  Genius  of  the  Diction  of  New  Testament ;  Tholuck  on  the 
Importance  of  the  Study  of  Old  Testament;  Beckhaus  on  the  Interpretation  of  the 
Tropical  Language  of  New  Testament.  Vol.  II.— Storr  on  the  Meaning  of  '  The 
Kingdom  of  Heaven;'  Storr  on  the  Parables;  Storr  on  the  word  'HAHPfiMA;' 
Hengstenberg  on  Isaiah  liii.  Vol.  III.— Ullmann  on  Christ's  Sinlessness ;  Ruckert 
on  the  Resurrection  of  the  Dead;  Lange  on  the  Resurrection  of  the  Body;  M.  Stuart 
on  Future  Punishment. 

Tholuck's  Coidientary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.    2  vols.,  8s. 
Pareau  on  the  Interpretation  of  Old  Testament.     2  vols.,  8s. 
Stuart's  Syntax  of  the  New  Testament.    4s. 
Umbreit's  Exposition  of  the  Book  of  Job.    2  vols.,  8s. 
Steiger's  Commentary  on  First  Peter.    2  vols.,  8s. 

BiLLROTH'S  COMilENTARY  ON  THE  CORINTHL^NS.      2  VOls.,  83. 

Kjrummacher's  Cornelius  the  Centurion.    3s. 

WiTsius'  Exposition  of  the  Lord's  Prayer.    4s. 

Rosenmuller's  Biblical  Geography  of  Central  Asia.    2  vols.,  8s. 

Rosenmuller's  Biblical  Geography  of  Asia  Minor,  Phcenicia,  &  Arabia.    4s. 

Rosenmuller's  Biblical  Mineralogy  and  Botany.    4s. 

Wemyss'  Clavis  Symbolica;  or,  Key  to  Symbolical  Language  of  Scripture.    4s. 

Calvin  on  the  Epistles  to  Galatians  and  Ephesians.    4s. 

Gess  on  the  Revelation  of  God  in  His  "Word.    3s. 

Rosenmuller  on  the  Messl/^nic  Psalms.    4s. 

Covard's  Life  of  Christlans  during  first  Three  Centuries.    4s. 

Tholuck's  Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  with  Dissertations  on 
Citations  from  Old  Testament  in  New  Testament,  and  on  the  Idea  of  Sacrifice 
and  Priest  in  Old  and  New  Testaments.     2  vols.,  8s. 

Calvin  and  Storr  on  the  Philippians  and  Colossians.    4s. 

Semisch's  Life,  Writings,  and  Opinions  of  Justin  Martyr.    2  vols.,  8s. 

Rohr's  Historico- Geographical  Account  of  Palestine  in  the  Time  of 
Christ.    4s. 

Tittmann's  Exegetical,  Critical,  and  Doctrinal  Commentary  on  St  John's 
Gospel.    2  vols.,  8s. 

Barbacovis'  Literary  History  of  Modern  Italy.    2s.  6d. 

My  Old  House;  or,  Tlie  Doctrine  of  Changes.    4s. 

Negris'  Edition  of  Herodotus,  with  English  Notes.    4s.  6d. 
„  „         Pindar,  „  „  4s.  6d. 

„  „  Xenophon,         „  „  2s. 

Welsh's  Elements  of  Church  History.    5s. 

Neander  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  and  on  the  Epistle  of  St 
James.    3s. 

Edersheim's  History  of  the  Jewish  Nation  after  the  Destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem UNDER  Titus.    4s. 


OTorfe^  ^ubti^I;ctr  by  C  &  €:.  Clarfe. 


Works  from  the  BIBLICAL  Cabinet,  etc.y  continued, 

Hoffmann's  Christianity  in  the  First  Century.    4s.  6c1. 

Kahnis'  Internal  History  of  German  Protestantism.    4s.  Cd. 

Ulrich  von  Hutten,  his  Life  and  Times.    4s. 

Nettleton  and  his  Labours.     Edited  by  Rnv.  A.  Bonar.    4s.  Cd. 

Patterson's  Illustrations,  Expository  and  Practical,  of  the  Farewell 

Discourse  of  our  Lord.    6s. 
"Wilson's  Kingdom  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.    7s.  6d. 
Thornley's  Skeleton  Themes.    3s. 

Thornley's  True  End  of  Education,  and  the  Means  adapted  to  it.    3s.  6d. 
Anderson's  Chronicles  of  the  Kirk.    3s.  6d. 


The  following  Tracts,  issued  in  tJie  STUDENT'S  CABINET  LIBRARY 
OF  Useful  Tracts,  are  also  offered  as  under : — 


Lowman's  Argument  d  priori  for  the 
Being  of  a  God.    6d. 

JOUFFROY  ON  THE  METHOD  OF  PHILOSO- 
PHICAL Study.     Is. 

Jouffuoy's  Essays  on  History  of  Philo- 
sophy; Philosophy  of  History;  Influ- 
ence OF  Greece  on  the  DE^'ELOPMENT 

OF  HuaiANITY ;   AND  PRESENT  StATB  OF 

Humanity.    9d. 

JoUFFROY  ON  SCEPTICISM  OF  PRESENT  Age; 

Faculties  of  Human  Soin. ;  Good  and 
Evil  ;  Eclecticism  in  Morals  ;  and  on 
Philosophy  and  Comsion  Sense.    Is. 

Cousin  on  the  Destiny  of  Modern  Phi- 
losophy.   6d. 

Cousin's  Exposition  of  Eclecticism. 
Is.  6d. 

Murdock's  Sketches  of  Modern  Pihlo- 
SOPHY,  especially' among  the  Germans.  Is. 

Edwards'  State  of  Slavery  in  Ancient 
Greece.    4d. 

Edwards'  State  of  Slavery  in  the  Early 
AND  Middle  Ages  of  the  Christian 
Era.    6d. 

Hitchcock  on  the  Connection  between 
Geology  and  Natural  Religion.    4d. 

Hitchcock's  Historical  and  Geological 
Deluges  Compared.    2  Parts,  9d.  each.* 

Eichhorn's  Life  and  Writings  of  Mi- 

CHAELIS.     6d. 

StAudlin's    History    of    Theological 

Knowledge  and  Literature.    4d. 
Verplanck  on  the  Right  Moral  Influ- 
ence &  Use  of  Liberal  Studies.    4d. 
Ware  on  the  Character  and  Duties  of 

A  Physician.    4d. 
Story  on  the  Progress  of  Literature, 

Science,  and  Government.     2  Parts, 

4d.  and  9d. 
Life  of  Niebuhb.    By  his  Son.    6d. 


Life  of  Madame  de  Stael.    9d. 

Sawyer's  Popular  Treatise  on  Biblical 
Interpretation.    6d. 

Stuart's  Philological  Vmw  of  Modern 
Doctrines  of  Geology.    6d. 

Life  of  Lady  Russell.    9d. 

Channing  on  Slavery.    6d. 

Ware  on  Extemporaneous  Prkachino. 
9d. 

C1LA.NNING  ON  Fenelon.    4d. 

Channing  on  Napoleon  Bonaparte.    Cd. 

Everett  on  the  I»iportance  of  Scien- 
tific Knowledge.    9d. 

Sir  Joshua  Reynolds'  Discourses  to  the 
Students  of  Royal  Academy.    Is.  6d. 

Channing  on  Self-Culture.    6d. 

Channing  on  the  Importance  of  a  Na- 
tional Literature.    4d. 

Neqris'  Literary  History  of  Modern 
Greece.    4d. 

Reynolds  on  the  Necessity  of  Physical 
Culture  to  Literary  Men.    4d. 

Hitchcock  on  the  Connection  between 
Geology  and  the  Mosaic  Account  of 
Creation.    Is. 

Story's  History  of  the  Law.    9d. 

Lord  Sto well's  Judgment  in  case  of 
Dalryriple  v.  Dalrymple.    Is.  6d. 

Lord  STo^VELL's  Judgment  in  cases  of 
THfi  'Maria'  and  'Gratitudine.'  Is.  6d. 

Lord  Liverpool  on  the  Conduct  of 
Great  Britain  in  respect  of  Neutral 
Nations.    Is.  6d. 

Controversy  relative  to  Prussia's  At- 
tachment of  British  F  unds  in  Reprisal 
FOR  Captures.    Is.  6d. 

Burke's  Letter  to  a  Noble  Lord.    6d. 

Warnkonio's  Analysis  of  Savigny  oir 
the  Law  of  Possession.    6d. 


II 
I 


STORIES     FOR    CHILDREN. 


The  Flower  Basket.    BySchmid.  Is.  fid. 
Easter  Eggs,  and  Robin  Redbreast.    By 

Schmid.     6d. 
The  Littlb  Lamb.    By  Schmid.    6d. 


The  Little  Dove.    By  Krummacher.    4d. 
The  Minister  of  Andol'sk.     By  Mowes. 
Is.  6d. 


38,  George  ^tmt,  (Ktrmljurs^. 


WORKS    OF    JOHN    CALVIN, 

IN  51  VOLUMES,  DEMY  8vo. 

Messrs  glare:  beg  respectfully  to  announce  that  the  whole  Stock  and  Copyrtptttq  nf 
the  WORKS  OP  CALVIN,  pubUshed  by  the  Calvin  TranslatiorSoSv  are  now  t^^^^ 
CZ'Sle't^r^'J^  "^'^^'^^  '""^^^  '^  ^^^^^  ^y  them  on  the^U^wTng  ve'r^ 

1.  ^^^f.^\lf^,ll3J''}'''^P,%^^  (Original  Subscription  price  about 

£13.)    The    Letters,'  edited  by  Dr  Boxnet,  2  vols.,  10s.  6d.  additional 

2.  Complete  Sets  of  Commentaries,  45  vols.,  £7,  17s.  6d. 

3.  A  Selection  of  Six  Volumes  (or  more  at  the  same  proportion)  for  21s.,  with  the 

exception  of  the  Institutes,  3  vols.  '       ^ 

4.  Any  Separate  Volume  (except  Institutes),  Gs. 
The  Contents  of  the  Series  are  as  follow:— 

Commentary  on  Zechariah  and  Malachi,  1 

vol. 
Harmony  of  the  Synoptical  Evangelists, 

3  vols. 


Institutes  of  the  Christian  Religion,  3  vols. 
Tracts  on  the  Reformation,  3  vols. 
Commentary  on  Genesis,  2  vols. 
Harmony  of  the  last  Four  Books  of  the 

Pentateuch,  4  vols. 
Commentary  on  Joshua,  1  vol. 
^     on  the  Psalms,  5  vols. 
*■     on  Isaiah,  4  vols. 

^     on  Jeremiah  and  Lamentations,  5  vols. 
'     on  Ezekiel,  2  vols. 
^     on  Daniel,  2  vols. 
-^     on  Hosea,  1  voL 
-r     on  Joel,  Amos,  and  Obadiah,  1  vol. 
*'     on  Jonah,  Micah,  and  Nahum,  1  vol. 
-r     on  Habakkuk,  Zephaniah,  and  Haggai, 

1  voL 


Commentary  on  John's  Gospel,  2  vols. 

-r     on  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  2  vols. 

^     on  Romans,  1  vol. 

^     on  Corinthians,  2  vols. 

-r     Galatians  and  Ephesians,  1  vol. 

^     on  Philippians,  Colossians,  and  Thes- 

salonians,  1  vol. 
-r     on  Timothy,   Titus,  and  Philemon,  1 

vol. 
^     on  Hebrews,  1  vol. 
^     on  Peter,  John,  James,  and  Jude,  1  vol. 


In  Two  Volumes,  8vo,  price  14b.  (1300  pages), 

THE  INSTITUTES  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION. 

By    JOHN    CALYIN. 

Translated  by  HENRY  BEVERIDGE. 

This  translation  of  Calvin's  Institutes  was  originally  executed  for  the  Calvin  Transla- 
tion Society,  and  is  universally  acknowledged  to  be  the  best  English  version  of  the  work. 
The  Publishers  have  reprinted  it  in  an  elegant  form,  and  have  at  the  same  time  fixed  a 
price  so  low  as  to  bring  it  within  the  reach  of  all. 


In  One  Volume,  8vo,  price  8s.  Cd., 

CALVIN: 

HIS    LIFE,    LABOURS,   AND   WRITINGS. 

By   FELIX     BUNGENER, 

AUTHOR  OF  THE   '  HISTORY  OF  THE  COUNCH.  OF  TRENT,'  ETC. 

'  M.  Bungener's  French  vivacity  has  admirably  combined  with  critical  care  and  with 
admiring  reverence,  to  furnish  what  we  venture  to  think  the  best  portrait  of  Calvin 
hitherto  drawn.  He  tells  us  all  that  we  need  to  know;  and  instead  of  overlaying  his 
work  with  minute  details  and  needless  disquisitions,  he  simply  presents  the  disencumbered 
features,  and  preserves  the  true  proportions  of  the  great  Reformer's  character.  We 
heartily  commend  the  work.' — Patriot. 

'Few  will  sit  down  to  this  volume  without  resolving  to  read  it  to  the  close.' — Clerical 
Journal. 


Wiovhi  3BviUi^})tti  hv  C  ^  C  Clarfe. 


JOHN  ALBERT   BENGEUS 

GNOMON    OF    THE    NEW   TESTAMENT. 

JDoto  S^it0t  tH^ranjSlatcU  into  ^nsli^l, 

WITH  ORIGINAL  NOTES,  EXPLANATORY  AND  ILLUSTRATIVE. 


I 

I 


The  Traxxslatiou  is  comprised  in  Five  Large  Volumes,  demy  8vo,  of  (on  an  average) 

fully  650  pages  each. 

Subscription,  31s.  6d.;  or  free  hy  Post,  35s. 

The  very  large  demand  for  BengeVs  Gnomon  enables  the  Publishers  still  to 
supply  it  at  the  Subscription  Price. 

The  whole  work  is  issued  under  the  Editorship  of  the  Rev.  Andrew  R.  Pausset,  M.A., 
Rector  of  St  Cuthbert's,  York,  late  University  and  Queen's  Scholar,  and  Senior 
Classical  and  Gold  Medalist,  T.C.D. 

*  There  are  few  devout  students  of  the  Bible  who  have  not  long  held  Bengel  in  the 
highest  estimation, — nay,  revered  and  loved  him.  It  was  not,  however,  without  some 
apprehension  for  his  reputation  with  English  readers,  that  we  saw  the  announcement  of 
a  translation  of  his  work.  We  feared  that  his  sentences,  terse  and  condensed  as  they  are, 
would  necessarily  lose  much  of  their  pointedness  and  force  by  being  clothed  in  another 
garb.  But  we  confess  gladly  to  a  surprise  at  the  success  the  translators  have  achieved 
in  preserving  so  much  of  the  spirit  of  the  original.  We  are  bound  to  say  that  it  is 
executed  in  the  most  scholarlLke  and  able  manner.  The  translation  has  the  merit  of 
being  faithful  and  perspicuous.  Its  publication  will,  we  are  confident,  do  much  to  bring 
back  readers  to  the  devout  study  of  the  Bible,  and  at  the  same  time  prove  one  of  the 
most  valuable  of  exegetical  aids.  The  "  getting  up  "  of  those  volumes,  combined  with 
their  marvellous  cheapness,  cannot  fail,  we  should  hope,  to  command  for  them  a  large 
sale.' — Eclectic  Review. 


In  crown  8vo,  price  6s., 

THE    8INLE88NE88    OF   JE8U8: 

AN  EVIDENCE  FOR  CHRISTIANITY. 

BY    DR    C.    ULLMANN. 

'  We  warmly  recommend  this  beautiful  work  as  eminently  fitted  to  diffuse,  among  those  1 
who  peruse  it,  a  hiprher  appreciation  of  the  sinlessness  and  moral  eminence  of  Christ.' 
British  and  Foreign  Evangelical  Review. 


In  demy  8vo,  price  9s., 

GERMAN     RATI0NALI8M 

IN  ITS  RISE,  PROGRESS,  AND  DECLINE.     A  CONTRIBUTION  TO  THE 
CHURCH  HISTORY  OF  THE  ISth  AND  19th  CENTURIES. 

BYDRK.     HAGENBACH. 

'This  is  a  volume  we  have  long  wished  to  see  in  our  language.  Hagenbach  is  a 
veteran  in  this  field,  and  this  volume  is  the  ablest,  and  is  likely  to  be  the  most  useful,  of 
his  works.' — British  Qttarterly  Review. 

'  There  is  not  a  work  more  seasonable,  not  one  more  likely  to  be  productive  of  the  best 
effects,  not  one  more  entitled  to  the  study  and  solemn  consideration  of  Christian  people.' 
— Christian  Witness. 

'  This  volume  can  hardly  be  surpassed  for  the  brevity  and  clearness,  and  for  the  skill 
with  which  the  main  points  in  the  great  works  of  the  Augiistan  age  of  German  literature 
are  brought  out  by  way  of  illustrating  their  relation,  direct  or  indirect,  to  Christianity.' — 
London  Review. 

_  *  A  most  valuable  and  attractive  volume,  and  a  really  useful  addition  to  our  too  scanty 
histories  of  the  growth  of  religious  ideas  and  the  progress  of  thought.' — Churchman. 


fcvc-qH    Tv«^'     ^r,r,vo  4.p,